Habemus papam! (1 Viewer)

[The_Doc_Man]

Maybe you have trouble conceiving of inalienable rights because they come from God and you are not a believer.

I see how many inalienable rights are recognized in the Islamic world that supposedly believes in an Abrahamic god.

To couch this in simple terms, the Biblical Adam had infinite rights. Inalienable is a separately debatable question. When Eve came along, one might guess that SHE had inalienable rights since she was built from Adam's rib. Then came Cain and Abel, who by inheritance should have also had inalienable rights. Except that Cain decided to not consider Abel's rights. Inalienable rights end when society begins.

Man has infinite inalienable rights, as many as can be imagined. That's the key word... imagined. The law of the jungle that society TRIED to override is that your pursuit of happiness and your life and liberty depend on outrunning or outsmarting the predators that pursue you.

 

[Thales750]

I'm 100% against the death penalty, as long as mankind has so many errors in the system, which it always will as it is fallible.

Timothy McVeigh

That was the case the convinced me that the death penalty not as useful as proponents of it claim it to be. Before that I would say i was ok with capital punishment. Not so much anymore.
I have list of reason if you are interested, I may have forgotten some of them but I'll try if you ask.

 

[Pat Hartman]

I don't think the death penalty is much of a deterrent either. It should be a way for us to permanently dispose of people who commit what society thinks of as unforgivable crimes so we don't have to pay potentially millions of tax payer dollars to keep them locked up for life. Instead, the bleeding heart liberals have turned it into a farce just as they are currently doing with fake "due process" to which illegal aliens who have already had deportation orders levied seem to be, in the liberal's pea brains, entitled to. So, it is probably best to just get rid of it and avoid all the appeals. Life in prison without parole, means life and hopefully, not a very good life either.

The Israelis have a better system for the death penalty. They require two witnesses and don't rely on circumstantial evidence or forensic evidence which may be flawed.

@Issac The 6th commandment is technically - Thou shall not murder which is not the same as kill. God recognizes the rare need to kill someone.

 

[Isaac]

I have a philosophical approach to crime/punishment/deterrent: That is = No punishment should ever be justified because "it's a deterrent to others". The punishment should be due to the person who committed the crime, not for others, or to others, or for other purposes, or for off-label benefits.
If I rob an apple from a vendor, killing me is a great deterrent to other robbers - but it's not fair. The 'deterrent' is an unfair injection of "for other purposes" that has nothing to do with the person and crime committed.

The main purpose of punishment should be to keep society safe and that's it. Beyond that we are not arbiters of God's justice.

 

[Isaac]

@Issac The 6th commandment is technically - Thou shall not murder which is not the same as kill. God recognizes the rare need to kill someone.

Isaac. I know, but I believe the old testament is replete with examples of things that do not apply to the current day.

 

[Isaac]

Timothy McVeigh

That was the case the convinced me that the death penalty not as useful as proponents of it claim it to be.

Why? I'd genuinely like to learn something here, what was it about tim Mcveigh that made you think that?

 

[Thales750]

Why? I'd genuinely like to learn something here, what was it about tim Mcveigh that made you think that?

I compiled a list of reasons.
At the time there was talk of coconspirators. With him dead, he would never reveal this.
His life was not worth even one of those 165 people. A more fitting punishment would be to lock him away until insanity took his life.
It seems I have forgotten the other 5 reasons, but none of them were, as Pat said, liberal bleeding heart reasons.

I watched a documentary at the time, where they interviewed the families of the victims. Not a single one expressed they were feeling better after his execution. They may have edited it to reflect that sentiment but the ones they did air were very convincing.

Really, the only one that suffered from his execution was his mother. The needles saw to that. You can't let the prospect of his soul burning in hell assuage your desire for him to suffer. I wanted him to suffer, pure and simple. He is not suffering, at least not in this earthly confine.

I know I didn't like the idea of state employees executing someone as part of their job. I don't think too much of that one anymore, people line up for those kinds of jobs. Although, I imagine, not without some pretty substantial psychological issues.

There were more, but the one that got me started down that road was the prospect of someone else's involvement and McVeigh would never testify to it.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

I am in favor of the death penalty but only with extreme caution. If there is any doubt whatsoever, there can be no imposition of the death penalty. If the evidence is good, the (multiple) witnesses are good, and if there is a non-coerced confession, then MAYBE there is enough to justify a death penalty. BUT once you reach the point where you are going to do it, do it in a way that gets the job done as fast as possible so as to minimize suffering. NO, I did NOT say "eliminate suffering." The human body is too resilient to be able to guarantee that using the methods that require the inmate to remain conscious while it happens.

I'm kind of in favor of the guillotine, but only because we can't use the method employed to kill USAF Major "King" Kong, played by veteran western actor Slim Pickens in the movie Dr. Strangelove. The fallout cloud would be too big. Maybe inject a round of propofol followed by the blade. Having been under propofol for shoulder surgery, prostate surgery, a cholecystectomy, and several colonoscopies, I can tell you that you don't feel a thing with propofol in your system. They tell you to count down from 100. I usually make it to about 95 and its lights out! But for some reason, the condemned person is supposed to be awake, which I feel is contrary to the concept of avoiding cruel and unusual punishment.

 

[Pat Hartman]

I know, but I believe the old testament is replete with examples of things that do not apply to the current day.

I don't necessarily disagree with that. The bible has no problem with slavery for example and Muslims still practice it. But I think the 10 Commandments go beyond the other Bible stories.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

I believe the old testament is replete with examples of things that do not apply to the current day.

Yes, but admonitions exist in the Bible (that include the Old Testament in their scope) saying that you must not augment or diminish what is in the Bible. That is, in fact, one of the problems I have with "holy books" in general. If we aren't supposed to make progress, then it is OK to say that the Bible or the Qur'an is good for all time - but we HAVE been making philosophical progress. Modern Western ideas (such as "all men are created equally" from the time of the American Revolution and "liberte', egalite', fraternite'" from the French Revolution) have bypassed the 4th century (for the Bible) and the 7th century (for the Qu'ran). But those books haven't changed. I'm going to assume that Joseph Smith didn't rewrite the Bible for the Mormon religion, he just added to it. But after 1500 years, give or take a few, those books seem miserably stagnant and approaching totally irrelevant to the modern world.

 

[Thales750]

Yes, but admonitions exist in the Bible (that include the Old Testament in their scope) saying that you must not augment or diminish what is in the Bible. That is, in fact, one of the problems I have with "holy books" in general. If we aren't supposed to make progress, then it is OK to say that the Bible or the Qur'an is good for all time - but we HAVE been making philosophical progress. Modern Western ideas (such as "all men are created equally" from the time of the American Revolution and "liberte', egalite', fraternite'" from the French Revolution) have bypassed the 4th century (for the Bible) and the 7th century (for the Qu'ran). But those books haven't changed. I'm going to assume that Joseph Smith didn't rewrite the Bible for the Mormon religion, he just added to it. But after 1500 years, give or take a few, those books seem miserably stagnant and approaching totally irrelevant to the modern world.

It only makes them irrelevant if that is what you seek. The teachings of Christ, have never been more relevant. The problem with American Christianity is that much of it is "Christian Nationalism". Modern Christianity can have so much in common with the Pharisees of that time.

 

[Thales750]

I am in favor of the death penalty but only with extreme caution. If there is any doubt whatsoever, there can be no imposition of the death penalty. If the evidence is good, the (multiple) witnesses are good, and if there is a non-coerced confession, then MAYBE there is enough to justify a death penalty. BUT once you reach the point where you are going to do it, do it in a way that gets the job done as fast as possible so as to minimize suffering. NO, I did NOT say "eliminate suffering." The human body is too resilient to be able to guarantee that using the methods that require the inmate to remain conscious while it happens.

I'm kind of in favor of the guillotine, but only because we can't use the method employed to kill USAF Major "King" Kong, played by veteran western actor Slim Pickens in the movie Dr. Strangelove. The fallout cloud would be too big. Maybe inject a round of propofol followed by the blade. Having been under propofol for shoulder surgery, prostate surgery, a cholecystectomy, and several colonoscopies, I can tell you that you don't feel a thing with propofol in your system. They tell you to count down from 100. I usually make it to about 95 and its lights out! But for some reason, the condemned person is supposed to be awake, which I feel is contrary to the concept of avoiding cruel and unusual punishment.

Mostly Agree.