toldailytopic: Is it always wrong to kill another human?
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
Selaphiel
Well-known member
The only possible occassion where killing might be necessary would be if it is absolutely the only way to save an innocent life at the cost of an assailant.
The death penalty is barbaric and serves absolutely no purpose in a society that can protect the public in other ways that does not include loss of any life, it does nothing but satisfy the bloodlust of the people. Mercy is greater than vengeance.
The death penalty is barbaric and serves absolutely no purpose in a society that can protect the public in other ways that does not include loss of any life, it does nothing but satisfy the bloodlust of the people. Mercy is greater than vengeance.
Is it mercy to lock a killer in a cage for fifty years until he dies?
Selaphiel
Well-known member
Did I say that?
Prison is necessary to protect the general public as long as the person in question is a danger to society. However, the purpose of prison should be rehabilitation, not mere retribution. Cruel and inhumane prison should not be an element in a civilized modern society.
Silent Hunter
Well-known member
. . . then what was the point of the post?
How merciful is it to allow a known murderer to live knowing that there is a possibility they could always murder again? Why is the concern for mercy always directed towards the murderers rather than the victims and future victims?
Lastly, a legal injection, in their case, IS much more than they deserve. Unlike their victims, they are allowed to say their good-byes and get their affairs in order.
Silent Hunter
Well-known member
The more reasonable christians here would say that this is a task best left to their deity's discretion.
Shouldn't we be compassionate toward victims and merciful toward perpetrators?
You seem more than willing to risk execution of the innocent to satisfy your lust for vengeance than for justice to be served.
OriginalOatmeal
New member
God does not enjoy spanking His children but it is for our own good.
Selaphiel
Well-known member
We have the capability to stop people from killing again without killing them. That is the purpose of high security prisons.
How is killing them mercy for the victims? It is simple vengeance, and we all know much that really helps, it does not alleviate the pain at all, all it accomplishes is the destruction of another life.
So according to you, their pain is healing the victims somehow? I think that is severely misguided, taking pleasure in their pain is ultimately a form of sadism. Want to get past the pain? Forgive them, that is something they do not know what to do with and it puts the tragedy in the past.
Which post?
That is every bit as reasonable as declining to have a cancerous tumor removed ...
Always ..
Of course ... rapists, murderers and child molesters should be charged, tried and receive the sentence of being *mercifully* dropped in the middle of the Arctic Ocean.
That is an assumption or claim you are making based solely on the fact that I disagree with you on the DP.
Feel free to find even one post where I have been shown to say that the standards for receiving the DP should allow for the innocent (because we know they are ALL innocent) to die.
Also, feel free to show that this is about *vengeance* rather than protecting society.
Did Ted Bundy murder anyone after his execution, SH?
Do murderers ever escape from prison?
How is that not merciful?
probably make the hungry polar bears happy :chew:
Silent Hunter
Well-known member
If they wish to follow their sacred writings . . .
:yawn:
No, it isn't. You seem alright with risking the execution of an innocent person. Sad.
There is ALWAYS the risk of executing an innocent person . . . no? Better to side with being safe . . . than . . . sorry.
Executions are ALWAYS about retribution (justice) . . . not . . . protection.
Did he murder anyone after he was convicted and locked up?
Are the innocent ever executed?
Selaphiel
Well-known member
Cruelty implies that you do it for the sake of inflicting suffering on the person for your own satisfaction. Imposing restrictions on the prisoner for the purpose of protecting the general population is not cruelty as long as it does not exceed what is necessary to achieve that goal.
Nor is it inhumane to imposing those restrictions as long as you have another set of purposes, which is to rehabilitate the prisoner.
Rusha said:
Does the state sometimes kill the wrong person? The chance of escaping from a maximum security prison is rather slim. If they do, the solution is to improve security as well as prison conditions, not killing the prisoners.
Rusha said:
What is that if it is not an emotionally motivated cry for blood and suffering?
Is it merciful to risk imprisoning someone who is innocent?
Silent Hunter
Well-known member
It happens but is not as permanent as execution . . . is it?
Have you stolen any bread today Jean Valjean?