Stitch on 4/7/2008 at 15:36
Quote Posted by Scots Taffer
I'm curious if Stitch even reckons people like that should be jailed for life.
Why wouldn't I?
Quote Posted by Tocky
If being civilized means we protect the worst at the expense of the weakest and most vulnerable innocents then I see no reason to be civilized.
Nobody is arguing for releasing child rapists on the streets.
Quote Posted by Starrfall
Basically all I'm interested in whether they think the same way about war as you do, and if not how they reconcile war with their views on state-initiated killing.
This just in: sometimes policemen have to take lives as well, still not inconsistent with thinking the state shouldn't be shooting inmates in a barrel.
The problem with this thread is it is essentially an inverse abortion debate. You can discuss the details all you want but at the center of it is a core belief that divides the two sides and this belief can't really be debated. The core divide here is I think state-level killing should be something of a last resort. Starry and heretic don't. Fair enough.
Just don't try to justify it to me with irrelevant and easily swatted non-arguments.
SubJeff on 4/7/2008 at 15:42
Quote:
You do realise that Mengele killed thousands or more with the exact same justification that you are using now?
Oh yeah, I missed this. And no, no he didn't.
Quote:
If it isn't for punishment then isn't the killing worse unless it's in self-defense?
Uhh, what? He is saying you shouldn't kill for punishment. Full stop. There is no 3rd reason suggested. Clearly killing for fun is a no-no.
Starrfall on 4/7/2008 at 15:55
I thought he was saying war isn't as bad as the death penalty because it isn't punishment?
Quote Posted by Stitch
This just in: sometimes policemen have to take lives as well, still not inconsistent with thinking the state shouldn't be shooting inmates in a barrel.
I'm not suggesting it is do try to keep up.
hopper on 4/7/2008 at 16:15
Quote Posted by Starrfall
If it isn't for punishment then isn't the killing
worse unless it's in self-defense? Is it not ok to kill to punish but ok to kill as a means of getting your way politically?
I'm with SE here. I see wars as justified in self-defense or to prevent crimes against humanity. I didn't mean to imply that "war is always OK as long as there's a political rationale for it", I just wanted to explain why war and punishment - capital or otherwise - are fundamentally different things.
Quote:
I equate the police sniper who kills a hostage-taker with someone acting in defense of others, but I'm not sure I'm getting the point you're trying to make about the bank robber who releases his hostages.
It was just another way of pointing out that not all state-sanctioned killings are morally on the same level because the rationale behind them are different. The police don't kill anybody on a crime scene because they "deserve to die". The fact that a hostage-taker might save his life if he surrenders illustrates this.
Starrfall on 4/7/2008 at 16:31
But not every war or police killing is on the same moral level because they don't all have the same rationale, so saying "it's just different!" over and over doesn't really do much.
I mean obviously just because cops occasionally have to kill without trial to save people doesn't mean they don't occasionally kill without trial just because they're pissed off at the defendant, right? It happened this week. And obviously just because some wars are fought in defense doesn't mean some aren't fought just because one country wants to get it's way politically.
I'd put the US civil war and the US revolution in the latter category. And I assume that if you'd do the same you'd consider those wars to be unjustified. And so I wonder if no-death-penalty americans would do the same because I think most americans (pro and anti) don't really have a problem with those two. (I don't know where you're from.)
edit: let me write stitch's and koyla's replies for them so they don't have to:
Quote:
oh god someone is asking me to flesh out my opinions i better just tell them they're wrong or stupid, that will distract everyone
edit again: lol too late!
Stitch on 4/7/2008 at 16:36
Quote Posted by Starrfall
I'm not suggesting it is do try to keep up.
Okay, you're not even trying now. Snarky quips only work if there's some meat behind them.
I'm pretty convinced at this point that you're actually ridiculously against capital punishment and you're trying to prove a point.
HAPPY FOURTH OF JULY EVERYBODY :cool:
AR Master on 4/7/2008 at 17:11
Did someone say snarky quips?
Stand back y'all, da 'master's on da scene
Kolya on 4/7/2008 at 17:23
Quote Posted by Starrfall
Well, if you can't explain the difference yourself then I'm going to say you're full of shit because it's your views I'm asking about.
Haha, am I seriously supposed to believe that you are interested in my views? Darling, please!
I think I'll rather watch you become hysteric from the other side of the room, if you'll excuse me. ;)
Starrfall on 4/7/2008 at 17:38
Quote Posted by Kolya
I think I'll rather cower in shame from the other side of the room that I dared challenge your glory, if you'll excuse me.
Well ok :)
SubJeff on 4/7/2008 at 18:07
Quote Posted by Kolya
Haha, am I seriously supposed to believe that you are interested in my views? Darling, please!
I think she would be if they had any merit. You too scared to try?
