Tweet
I think Saddam understands what he did to others. It's just that he doesn't care. And torturing him will not make him care about others.
-
"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-Bokonon -
This is why you think there is a contradiction - you don't understand that we don't all agree with you. Your fundamental premise - everyone has an inviolable right to life - is purely subjective and not held by many.Originally posted by Q Cubed
The contradiction, Q cubed, is opposing the death penalty for the guilty and supporting it for the blameless unborn
everyone has the right to life. no human has the right to abrogate another's right to life, no matter how inhuman the other person has behaved--unless you are willing to set yourself as superior to them, removing both their humanity away and your own.Comment
-
and killing him will make a difference then how ?B♭3Comment
-
This is why you think there is a contradiction - you don't understand that we don't all agree with you. Your fundamental premise - everyone has an inviolable right to life - is purely subjective and not held by many.
oh, i realize this. this is why i don't support legislation against abortion.
B♭3Comment
-
It wouldn't. Like I said earlier, I don't think he should be killed or tortured."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
An eye for an eye makes the world blind only if we don't recognize when the slate is clean. An endless cycle of retribution happens only if something doesn't tell us when to stop. That something is the court system.Originally posted by Q Cubed
yes, i can see the wisdom in gandhi's statement that an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. in cases like this, where saddam brutalized people, it--to me--only makes sense that he should walk a mile in their shoes.Comment
-
Revenge is generally accepted to be immoral. That's partially reflected in our justice system. If I kill someone out of revenge, I get sent to prison. But why does it become moral when the state kills people?"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
I meant revenge as administered by our justice system
In fact, the morality of vengeance (by the courts) is one the key foundations of our justice system. Otherwise, there is so much there that is really injustifiable.Comment
-
You didn't answer the question. Why should I get thrown in prison if I kill out of revenge, but the state should be applauded if it kills out of revenge?
And yeah, a lot of the justice system is totally unjustifiable to me."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
Because you are a vigilante if you do so - you have no "right" to administer revenge. Only the courts have the right to sentence people.Comment
-
But I have the right to kill out of self-defense, right? So why should the state have the right to kill out of revenge, but not me? And furthermore, why should killing out of revenge warrant my possible execution?"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
Why? It works. Not necessarily the death penalty part, but the state engaging in retribution. The trick is finding the happy middle ground behind what is considered "enlightened" for the time period and what is considered "barbaric". The pendulem swings back and forth depending on the country, time period, and the society. Not enough retribution and you descend into anarchy, look at the thread on sentencing in Europe and Pekka's description of the problems in Finland. Too much retribution, i.e. PRC and Texas, and innocent people get executed. Like most practical solutions to moral and ethical problems, it's messy, prone to error, but we muddle through and hopefully learn from our mistakes (I am an optimist).The worst form of insubordination is being right - Keith D., marine veteran. A dictator will starve to the last civilian - self-quoted
And on the eigth day, God realized it was Monday, and created caffeine. And behold, it was very good. - self-quoted
Klaatu: I'm impatient with stupidity. My people have learned to live without it.
Mr. Harley: I'm afraid my people haven't. I'm very sorry… I wish it were otherwise.Comment
-
I have not posting in a while on apolyton, thus that is why I am responding now to your post.
Well neither will putting him in prison for the rest of his life. The reason why we punish people who murder is not to bring back the life of the person that was killed. Nothing we do can do that. Death Penality is a punishment, to make the cirminal pay for what he has done. The person that murdered show how little he views life. Why should he have the right to live when he has taken it from someone else.Originally posted by Q Cubed
the cycle of death must end.
if we kill saddam, will it bring back to life the young women his son uday raped and killed?
if we kill saddam, will it bring back the sanity of the woman lawyer whose mind was destroyed because she had the gall to defend someone against saddam?
if we kill saddam, will it bring back those servicemen who sacrificed themselves?
As for the lawyer, weather or not Saddam is put to death or not would not make a defference. If their sanity if effected in the end it does not matter what punishment he gets. But I doubt that any lawyer would have his or her sanity effected my this trial. But I think he is crazy enough to try and defend himself with out of lawyer.
Again you are wrong there. Once someone takes the life of anther, in my view they gave up their right to live.i am opposed to the death penalty because i believe every life is sacred, no matter whose, and what they chose to do with it. your life has as much of a right to exist as saddam's--the only difference is, you haven't used yours for evil. because everybody has a fundamental right to life--even murderers--and because we are ourselves only human, we should not be the ones meting out judgement.
They must pay for what they have done. No other punishment for Saddam in my view would do his victoms justice, expect for his death.
That I think would only be punishment enough for the tortured, it would not be enough for the millions he has killed. Besides if you did turn him over to his victoms, they would most likely kill him after torturing him for a while or he would die from the torture.babies deserve a right to sacred life. that is why i oppose abortion. the terminally ill should want to live. that is why i oppose euthanasia. and those that murder have a right to their sorry ass lives. that is why i oppose the death penalty.
besides, who said that the remainder of his days would be pleasant? hand him over to the families of those he tortured; let them torture him until the end of his days.
I do believe that babies have a right to live, that outways the rights of the mother being able to do what she wants with her body. But Like I said I think that when you murder someone you have given up your right to live.Comment
-
It doesn't. Look at the places with the harshest sentences, places like the US and Russia. They also happen to have some of the highest crime rates, particularly violent crime rates. OTOH, the places with more reasonable sentences, such as most of Western and Northern Europe, have some of the lowest crime rates.Why? It works.
A reasonble justice system shouldn't be based on something barbaric and senseless like revenge, but maximizing the freedom of society. Killing or torturing Saddam does absolutely nothing to increase anyone's freedom; it only takes away freedom from him."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
Why shouldn't he have the right to live? I value human life, and human freedom. I don't think anyone's life or freedom should be taken away without a damn good reason. Revenge is an idiotic one.Death Penality is a punishment, to make the cirminal pay for what he has done. The person that murdered show how little he views life. Why should he have the right to live when he has taken it from someone else."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
Comment