Fungi Forums
Miscellaneous => General Chat => Not at the Dinner Table => Topic started by: Hello:) on December 23, 2012, 06:19:05 PM
-
Discuss.
-
Depends on the moral framework you're employing.
According to Christianity, "You shall not kill" is a moral imperative, although God himself frequently breaks his own rule in the Old Testament. Trying to figure that out is a barrel full of fun in itself.
Utilitarianism says it's okay if the alternative produces less desirable results. Most utilitarians prefer life in prison over execution, I think.
Rawlsian deontologists believe an act is wrong if it breaks a rule that rational individuals agree upon behind a veil of ignorance. Given that it's extremely difficult to prove guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt, they wouldn't desire the death penalty for heinous crimes (although they'd also seek to lock up convicted murderers).
Nihilists don't believe anything is right or wrong. Kick the ******* and hug his puppy.
-
Let's say you kill someone you are sufficiently convinced is a murderer. If I'm convinced they were innocent, would I be justified in killing you (...justified in whose eyes?)?
-
Also, this is relevant. Language warning:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAUv2OTVm9M
-
Let's say you kill someone you are sufficiently convinced is a murderer. If I'm convinced they were innocent, would I be justified in killing you (...justified in whose eyes?)?
Depends if there's absolute proof of the man being a murderer, if so, no. However, I mean with absolute proof.
-
Yes, I think it is wrong to kill someone who has committed murder. Displaced from the actual murder situation, it seems arbitrary to be allowed to kill someone who has once committed murder. Life if you meet an ex-convict who had killed someone long ago and served their time and repented for their past deeds, and you just kill them??? Especially since murdering that person makes you a murderer.
If you're being pursued by an attacker who just murdered someone a moment ago, then it seems not only justified but also advisable to defend yourself by any means necessary, even if that results in the attacker's death.
-
I guess, but I mean one who didn't go to jail for it.
-
Depends if there's absolute proof of the man being a murderer, if so, no. However, I mean with absolute proof.
Absolute proof in whose eyes?
If you're going to go with life-for-a-life, you have to either say that everyone can just use their own judgment (which means everyone can kill whoever they want), or you say "No, here's an authority who will decide who should be killed and who shouldn't, rather than just relying on our individual judgment" which is just government-enforced capital punishment (which I'm also opposed to, incidentally).
You're not Batman. And if the universe has a protagonist, it's certainly not any of us.
-
Actually I didn't mean me, I meant anyone. Except marioguy/sadib.
-
I dunno. I only believe in one entity higher than each of us, and that's us, and I suppose breaking your social contract is grounds for having you removed from the rest of society. So, maybe. Regardless, it's more expensive to have the death penalty than it is to have life sentences in prison. Combine that with moral uncertainty and you get my lack of support for capital punishment.
-
I'm surprised this guy knows who Sadib is.
-
Dude, I study FF history.
-
The American criminal justice system is way too focused on retribution, with no real efforts toward rehabilitation (a public sentiment that happens to mesh very well together with the privatized prison industry's profit motives). Once you've gotten a murderer off the streets, the public is safe -- killing him or her at that point serves no purpose other than letting us feel like we've "gotten back" at them, or making a governor or other politician look "tough on crime", which are all very immature reasons for wanting to end a human life. Add in inconsistent standards of evidence, biased juries and judges, states that execute people with an IQ of 70, and the lopsided race and gender gaps in death sentencing (for equal crimes, the death sentence is much more likely to be given to non-whites than to whites, and men than women) and it's just a really bad idea.
-
I think Sadib would have a field day with this. Anyway, when did this turn into an argument about the justice system, and why?
Crosseyed please be quiet.
Seriously though, CrossEyed, what if a murderer escaped? A death sentence makes sure that doesn't happen.
-
Dude, I study FF history.
I didn't know they were teaching that in schools today.
-
Seriously though, CrossEyed, what if a murderer escaped? A death sentence makes sure that doesn't happen.
So do secure windows.
-
So do secure windows.
There are other ways to escape.
-
Executing prisoners sure would make it easier to cut down on prison breaks.
Permanently sterilyzing high school students sure would make it easier to reduce teen pregnancy rates.
-
Anyway, back to the topic. Bible aside, (as in Turtlekid can't use it,), is killing a murderer wrong?
-
Bible aside, (as in Turtlekid can't use it,)
Implying Turtlekid even bothers to argue anymore. I haven't seen him post here in a while.
-
As he said, "it's not worth the energy".
-
Executing prisoners sure would make it easier to cut down on prison breaks.
Permanently sterilyzing high school students sure would make it easier to reduce teen pregnancy rates.
Executing prisoners would help offset murders.
Permanently sterilyzing high school students would help offset overpopulation.
-
Committing genocide would help curb overpopulation, so?
-
Teenagers=stupid.
Genocide=/=smart.
-
I won't argue with that, but that doesn't justify anything
-
High school students aren't responsible for overpopulation though. It's mostly developing nations where it's beneficial to have more children and access to birth control is nonexistence.
Also, teenagers are stupid because their brains aren't fully developed. Permanent solutions to temporary problems never work.
-
While teen pregnancy is always a concern, it is actually way down since we stopped putting lead in gasoline. The movie Idiocracy is based on a flawed concept, but I think you see the point.
-
I assume you're referring to the effect lead has on IQ? And that low IQ correlates with getting pregnant as a teen? Because I'm not sure what lead in gasoline has to do with teen pregnancy.
The movie Idiocracy is based on a flawed concept, but I think you see the point.
True. IQ isn't really hereditary, although the chances that a child will become a stupid adult increase substantially if he or she is raised by stupid parents.