Quote Originally Posted by Adam Wood View Post
Because it is the only known way to absolutely make sure that she never commits murder again.
Probably the only valid argument here. Do you think it does much for prevention of other people doing it since murder is usually a crime of passion?

Quote Originally Posted by Adam Wood View Post
Feeding her, housing her, giving her cable television and medical care the entire time....
Feed her nasty food (edible), give her a bunk in a shared house, and don't give her cable. You know those people don't get the movie chanels, and that's really the only thing that makes cable worth it.

Quote Originally Posted by Adam Wood View Post
Sure it is. There is no way to punish someone more than killing them.
Ohhhhhh, yes there is. You're not very creative, are you? I once heard a suggestion that bin Laden should be given every nasty disease in the world with no cure and be forced to live with it. Obviously, I don't support that. Life in prison can be worse for some people, and you just admitted that.

Quote Originally Posted by Adam Wood View Post
Sure, you can take some sort of satisfaction from keeping them in prison forever. That is a reaction based solely upon the notion of wanting her to hurt for her crimes, which is directly in contravention of the entire intent of the "cruel and unusual" clause. It's not about you exacting your pound of flesh, and neither is the death penalty. It's about making sure that this person never commits a heinous crime again.
Actually, sentencing is supposed to be about punishment, retribution, and rehabilitation. This doesn't mean let Jodi back out, but I don't see a problem with trying to rehabilitate her.