Fox News reports that the Supreme Court of the United States will hear a case that will examine the question of whether the current lethal injection method is a "cruel and unusual punishment", as per the Eighth Amendment. I welcome this development, as I hope that rich countries will do away altogether with capital punishment, as we do not need to kill prisoners to protect society. However, the issue of the cruelty of injecting potassium chloride into humans raises other issues.
The last chemical [potassium chloride] is considered to be incredibly painful. The lawyers argue "if the intended dose of thiopental is not injected successfully, or does not bring about general anesthesia, the inmate will experience both the terror and agony of conscious suffocation and the excruciating pain caused by the potassium, but will appear peaceful and unconscious to observers."
Interesting. Potassium chloride is a feticidal agent used to killed unborn children, often in the latter stages of the pregnancy, when there is a chance the baby may survive.
It's an established fact that babies feel pain past 20 weeks. If potassium chloride is cruel in spite of the use of an anesthetic, what about injecting potassium chloride into the heart of the baby without an anesthetic?
I also know that some research animals are anesthitized the same way with an anestethetic.
If the US Supreme Court rules in favour of the defendant, will that signify that the forces on the left will dutifully inform women contemplating a late-term abortion that an injection of potassium chloride to the heart of the unborn child can be incredibly painful?
Somehow, I doubt it.
If the baby has to suffer a potassium chloride injection, oh well! Tough luck for the baby, say feminists. They don't care. Only the woman matters. Everyone else's humanitarian concern for the baby must be set aside in the name of feminist supremacy.
For more social conservative news check out BigBlueWave.ca