What's new
By:

Is the death penalty morally wrong?

Stoked said:
I am for doctor assisted suicide. Maybe if the individual, their doctor, their lawyer and their shrink sing off on it...?
Click to expand...
Me too
 
LogGrad98 said:
Gotcha. Death penalty for underage drinking and backtalking. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.
Click to expand...

Your obviously missing the whole point and being vacuous! The crime wasn't just "underage" drinking (in fact, just how old the son was isn't stated but since he was old enough to drink, we can assume he was of age!) And it wasn't just "backtalking" but rather consistent, habitual, and "flagrant" disrespect and disregard for his parents both in word and action! And if the parents had been negligent in regards to their responsibility to train, discipline and nurture the needs of their son then THEY would be held responsible NOT the child! In any case, because of this divine law and direction, there was very LITTLE juvenile delinquency in the nation of Israel at the time!
 
carolinajazz said:
Your obviously missing the whole point and being vacuous! The crime wasn't just "underage" drinking (in fact, just how old the son was isn't stated but since he was old enough to drink, we can assume he was of age!) And it wasn't just "backtalking" but rather consistent, habitual, and "flagrant" disrespect and disregard for his parents both in word and action! And if the parents had been negligent in regards to their responsibility to train, discipline and nurture the needs of their son then THEY would be held responsible NOT the child! In any case, because of this divine law and direction, there was very LITTLE juvenile delinquency in the nation of Israel at the time!
Click to expand...

In that era everyone drank. It was one of the few sources of pure water. Do your research.
 
carolinajazz said:
...so, repeat offenders of DUI who have killed innocent victims because of there refusal to change there ways....should continue living so they can kill and mane other innocent victims?
Click to expand...
That sure isn't what we we were taking about a second ago.
 
I am opposed to the death penalty. There are several reasons for this:

1. I do not believe that the death penalty is commensurate with a modern, democratic society. It is a relic of older, more brutal, less judicious times, and does not belong to modern society. Here is a link on countries that have the death penalty: https://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0777460.html. This is not good company that the US is keeping.

2. Despite talk about any deterrent effect (and it's deterrent effect is debatable), the death penaly is administered within the context of 'retribution,' 'revenge,' etc. I am concerned about any judicial system that is based on such principles.

3. The death penalty is disproportionately applied to people of color and in lower income groups--those who cannot afford good representation or who are victimes of systemtic bias in the judicial system. It's administration is far too inequitably applied for my tastes.

4. A large enough people on death row, or even convicted of other crimes, have been later exonerated for a variety of reasons. There can be no doubt that a non-trivial number of people on death row are probably innocent. In the case of the death penalty, there can be NO room for error. If we accept that error does and can exist, then there can be no 'final punishment.

5. State sanctioned killing of humans, regardless of their guilt, is henious and (as already mentioned above) a barbaric relic of past times. We should NEVER allow the state such power as to kill its citizens.

I used to support the death penalty, but I can no longer do so, for the reasons cited above, and others.
 
jimmy eat jazz said:
I am opposed to the death penalty. There are several reasons for this:

1. I do not believe that the death penalty is commensurate with a modern, democratic society. It is a relic of older, more brutal, less judicious times, and does not belong to modern society. Here is a link on countries that have the death penalty: https://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0777460.html. This is not good company that the US is keeping.

2. Despite talk about any deterrent effect (and it's deterrent effect is debatable), the death penaly is administered within the context of 'retribution,' 'revenge,' etc. I am concerned about any judicial system that is based on such principles.

3. The death penalty is disproportionately applied to people of color and in lower income groups--those who cannot afford good representation. It's administration is far too inequitable applied for my tastes.

4. A large enough people on death row, or even convicted of other crimes, have been later exonerated for a variety of reasons. There can be no doubt that a non-trivial number of people on death row are probably innocent. In the case of the death penalty, there can be NO room for error. If we accept that error does and can exist, then there can be no 'final punishment.

5. State sanctioned killing of humans, regardless of their guilt, is henious and (as already mentioned above) a barbaric relic of past times. We should NEVER allow the state such power as to kill its citizens.

I used to support the death penalty, but I can no longer do so, for the reasons cited above, and others.
Click to expand...

1) I have no moral objection to seeking ultimate vengeance for the killing of a loved one.

2) I don't think vengeance should be a function of the state.

3) For pragmatic reasons the state can't allow revenge killings.
 
jimmy eat jazz said:
I am opposed to the death penalty. There are several reasons for this:

1. I do not believe that the death penalty is commensurate with a modern, democratic society. It is a relic of older, more brutal, less judicious times, and does not belong to modern society. Here is a link on countries that have the death penalty: https://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0777460.html. This is not good company that the US is keeping.

2. Despite talk about any deterrent effect (and it's deterrent effect is debatable), the death penaly is administered within the context of 'retribution,' 'revenge,' etc. I am concerned about any judicial system that is based on such principles.

3. The death penalty is disproportionately applied to people of color and in lower income groups--those who cannot afford good representation or who are victimes of systemtic bias in the judicial system. It's administration is far too inequitably applied for my tastes.

4. A large enough people on death row, or even convicted of other crimes, have been later exonerated for a variety of reasons. There can be no doubt that a non-trivial number of people on death row are probably innocent. In the case of the death penalty, there can be NO room for error. If we accept that error does and can exist, then there can be no 'final punishment.

5. State sanctioned killing of humans, regardless of their guilt, is henious and (as already mentioned above) a barbaric relic of past times. We should NEVER allow the state such power as to kill its citizens.

I used to support the death penalty, but I can no longer do so, for the reasons cited above, and others.
Click to expand...

The idea I have bolded above always interests me. Are you saying that we are executing far too many innocent people of color or lower income? Is it that we let too many people of higher income and that are white get away with crimes that would deserve the death penalty too frequently? Is it a matter of people with means and of the "right" color getting more favorable sentences? Or should we be letting some people of color or with lower incomes skate to even out the percentages? I am always interested in hearing 1) how this comes to be and what is implied/inferred through such statements, and 2) what needs to be done about it, if anything.
 
carolinajazz said:
...so, repeat offenders of DUI who have killed innocent victims because of there refusal to change there ways....should continue living so they can kill and mane other innocent victims?
Click to expand...

Nice dramatic change of subject.

I was unaware that cars existed during biblical times.

Oh I know! DUIs = Donkeying Under the Influence! Damn that is barbaric and heinous. Donkeys have never been the same.

Not to mention your insinuation that because I am against the death penalty for DUIs (you assumed and for once in your life you got something right) I am against punishment. Who said anything about letting DUIs go free? Especially in a case where someone died from a hit and braying.
 
Morally wrong no.

I also think letting people sit it out in a cell (depending on the prison) is more of a punishment than death.
I guess it all depends on the crime. Sometimes you just cant stand having that person alive.
 
What if we let the families or the victims themselves (when possible) decide on the punishment? Give them like a kiosk with a multiple choice menu?

I vote we have "flaying" on the menu for child rapists. As the only option.
 
jimmy eat jazz said:
3. The death penalty is disproportionately applied to people of color and in lower income groups--those who cannot afford good representation or who are victimes of systemtic bias in the judicial system. It's administration is far too inequitably applied for my tastes.
Click to expand...

In 1971 a black Illinois state senator declared, in support of capital punishment: “I realize that most of those who would face the death penalty are poor and black and friendless. I also realize that most of their victims are poor and black and friendless and dead.”
 
carolinajazz said:
In 1971 a black Illinois state senator declared, in support of capital punishment: “I realize that most of those who would face the death penalty are poor and black and friendless. I also realize that most of their victims are poor and black and friendless and dead.”
Click to expand...

So what's your point, other than to buttress your already sterling reputation as the board's resident racist?

The death penalty is unfarily and inequitable administered among the more marginal members of society who cannot afford access to skilled representation and against whom the legal system is systematically biased. I oppose it regardless who the perpetrator is and who the victim is.

That American society continues to allow this barbaric relic to be perpetrated unfairly and inequitably is a moral stain and (along with things such as state sanctioned torture, another barbaric relic of the past) undermines our moral authority/credibility as a nation.
 
carolinajazz said:
I was just ex·trap·o·lating the Biblical situation to the modern day equivalent! But here again....you want to get cynical with your pseudo intellectual college education!
Click to expand...

I didn't go to college, so much for that defense. You were trying to make a point and failed miserably at it.
 
jimmy eat jazz said:
So what's your point, other than to buttress your already sterling reputation as the board's resident racist?

The death penalty is unfarily and inequitable administered among the more marginal members of society who cannot afford access to skilled representation and against whom the legal system is systematically biased. I oppose it regardless who the perpetrator is and who the victim is.

That American society continues to allow this barbaric relic to be perpetrated unfairly and inequitably is a moral stain and (along with things such as state sanctioned torture, another barbaric relic of the past) undermines our moral authority/credibility as a nation.
Click to expand...

I don't have a problem with that there is a death penalty. I do have a problem with how it is administered, passed and what not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top