Although I respect that opinion, I can’t be as clear as you can on the subject for an array of reasons. Including people that were on death row that have been cleared due to new types of DNA testing, etc. The law states better to let 20 men go free than to let 1 innocent die. If the system was efficient enough and I was confident that the right man would ALWAYS be executed I MIGHT have an opinion on the subject.
Until then I will respectfully remain ambivalent on the subject.
That is my point, pro-life does not mean all life is valuable. It means “…we think abortion is wrong, but I guess… we can kill somebody if he/she murders someone…”
Let’s assume that premise is true…
Don’t you think that pro-life in that case is a misnomer? “Pro” is defined as “For.” So the definition is “For-life.” Don’t you think it would be logical to use the word anti-abortion instead? Considering the fact that pro-lifers are not (according to you) truly pro-lifers?
We are not in athens so let’s drop the syntax suicide…we are not talking about not knowing if someone is guilty or not but if it is right to keep killers alive when they can’t control ourselves. This leads to softness of issues such as date rape. For example I was at a party and girls were getting drunk…guys that were very funny and silly got cold and precise with actions and plans…players or serial killers? Very similar.
What do think the death penalty achieves? It’s been shown to be a useless deterrant, isn’t particularly useful as a for of punishment and certainly does nothing to discipline or rehabilitate the offender. So what is it? Is the death penalty merely societies emotional reprisal toward the offender, in essence lowering their standards to their level?
I also believe that PK Dick may have had different intentions in mind when he wrote The Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch …
Perhaps the answer to your problem is that we step forward into a Brave New World.
I’m sorry but: not killing murderers -> date rape, is simply rediculous. Exactly where is the causal link?
Great points on paper and your words are very elequent but like any sexy periodization scheme we must look at results and not on the colors of the weekly volumes or cool sounding microcycle titles. We are in fact animals with some greater gifts and some can’t be rehabilitated. Sure send them to “new age jails” with no bars but they are still wild animals.
Who are you talking to? The forum or me? This thread is for the entire forum and not a clash of the titans.
"The Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch " - do a poll of the members here and see how many can relate to your post. Are you bringing fire from the gods to man or are you sharing nectar with Hades? Your example is very impressive and I respect your brains…but this is not a jimmy measuring thread but and exploration of clear concepts.
Rapists can be rehabiltated but my girlfriend worked with murderers and violent crime victims. You can put them on drugs and have them act like zombies and need people to feed them to keep them safe from themselves and others. The new age jails are just human zoos.
Are we not pulling the feeding tube or oxygen line for ourselves or for the patient? We may love someone and put them on life support but is that the right choice? Give people a fair fight but if they are terminal let the die or make them into servants like planet of the apes. Jeffry ate people…what if that was your brother? I forgive rapists and killers but feel that more agressive therapy is needed. When my girlfriend interviewed someone very famous in AZ she stated that the death penalty was prohibitive since it prevented him from killing mulitple people since he was affraid of getting caught. Sure he wanted better numbers like ichiro but it did make him THINK.
I have looked at various states in the US and various countries and have yet to hear good stats on the subject. Rehab who you can, kill who can’t be controlled, and save babies that deserve a chance.
DJP- good points about embryo transfer…now my friends at Harvard are going to clone people and I am curious what that will cause 20 years form now. I think vasectemy’s should be done to all males and make them able to be reversed when people are ready. If this is done most “mistake” abortions can be eliminated. Some of the research on the brain (robin1 please chime in if I am wrong) and women having intercourse is very interesting and perhaps could illustrate the concept of why humans are not too primative after all in terms of possible religous beliefs. Sounds wacky but the numbers at clinics in Tampa are clear. People are not responsible.
But where is the contradiction in Dr Dowling’s argument? It is an invention by the author (whom I think you will find is a rather staunch anti-abortionist on religious grounds), that utilised the afforementioned fallacies, to ridicule and discredit a particular view point. That is why I brough into question the logic of Koukl’s passage - essentially the one point you focussed on is a straw man.
Not at all, the consciousness of the fetus or the convicted murderer is a mere side argument that has been brought up to appeal to emotion. The social implications I’m refferring to are more along the lines of Foucault’s thoughts …
Everybreath you take? Buddy wake up! We all love the police and sting (at least I do) but the brain is very delicate and we are all close to being dangerous.
“Caught between the scylla and charibdes”
“Mephistopheles is not your name”
Leave me breathless? Take my breath away…people can be dangerous…frat parties are the devil’s playground here in the US.
Coup de grace…Dazed state your solution …forget the sword play.
First up why shouldn’t I mention a particular novel, when you brought it up by mentioning it’s screen adaptation “The Minority Report”? Particularly in the face of you missing and misrepresenting the entire point of both book and movie. And yes, this was aimed straight at you and was simply bringing a point to light.
Second. Who said anything about sending any one to new age prisons? I merely pointed out that the death penalty is rather ineffective in respect to the expected outcomes. Do not attempt to put words in my mouth or distort my opinion to make your position stronger as you have done in the past Clemson.
Finally you are undoubtedly aware that there is a plethora of published papers suggesting that the death penalty is next to useless as a deterrant, for a multitude of reasons.
You mention “aggressive therapy”, if you are serious on the issue and not just trying to be cute with words (sounds inspired by SW Episode Two’s “aggressive negotiations”) then you imply that rehabilitation - the definitive goal of therapy - which is not achievable by killing the offender. If it’s punishment that you are after, there are far more effective ways, just ask the inmates of the panopticon. But that would would not satisfy your primal need for retribution now would it?
Address the social problem. Sweeping the dust under the carpet does not get rid of it … just means the room gets dirtier and dirtier …
Dear Clemson,
"
According to a number of studies, the major predicting or risk factors in adolescents (12-14y) for violent, criminal behaviour are in order of importance: week social ties, antisocial delinquent peers, gang membership, previous general offences, etc. For children (6-11y) the most significant factors are previous offences, substance abuse, being male, poverty, antisocial parents, etc. None of these factors, however, can predict with any certainty that a person will commit a felony. In fact, most people who fit this description do not become felons.
From this it follows that the most promising method of crime prevention is education. Children need to be taught from early age on to be responsible and law abiding citizens. They need to be helped and encouraged to develop and foster strong social ties and avoid contact with peers that have a negative influence on them.
Unfortunately, most schools nowadays only teach academic knowledge to children and adolescents and usually neglect the need for moral and ethical education. Parents, of course, also have a pivotal role to play in this process.
Such an education would also help people to learn to control and channel their instincts and emotions, which would solve a lot of the problems mentioned in this thread including that of unwanted pregnancies and abortions.
Another good way to channel aggressive impulses is by engaging in sports, of course.
I am not quite sure what you are referring to here. If you can elaborate on what you believe this research to have shown, I might be able to comment on this.
Regards,
Robin.
I am torn on the death penalty
(Warning kids, this will not be a “pretty” story…)
I worked in a jail (I thought it would be an “interesting job” for a while as I decided the course of my career…)
While there I had to guard a man that raped & killed a 4 year old girl because he liked her eyes. I have seen very few in the that time that had cold, evil in their eyes. I would have gladly pulled the switch on him myself.
Also in that time, 2 men were in for going to a house Christmas eve to get drug money from a guy that owed them… he jumped out the window so they shot the wife, 5 year old girl & 18 month old baby (as he was crawling away from them). One of the men supposedly also killed a young boy by throwing him in a lake & poking him with a stick just to watch him drown. He was the other in that time that eminated evil.
As well, there was a case of a man in jail since the age of 16 for a rape/murder though he always maintained his innocense… even to the point of being able to get out on parol if he confessed, which he would not do. Finally, because of his mother’s relentless campaigning to reopen the case, they discovered it was committed by another man (who had raped & killed many times before & since the incarceration of the innocent man). If we had the death penalty… the innocent man would have been executed & the truth would have probably died with him.
So you see… I think some would deserve the death penalty & the innocent do not… how do you decifer when the justice system cannot find the truth sometimes.
As for setting a 100 guilty men free if it means finding an innocent man… that’s crap because I would not want to live beside any of the guilty men I described above … would you???
That is why the "double jeaprody"clause in the US is beyond me… we don’t have that in Canada & they can try you as many times as they need to to get it right… OJ is lucky he was not here.
You stated: “Chris, many opponents of the death penalty hold their position not for the value of human life alone, but for the greater implications that it has for society in general.”
When I said: “In this case, it MAY look hypocritical, but many people are against the death penalty for different reasons than “pro-life.”
What makes our statement similar is that we BOTH agree that opponents of the death penalty hold their position for more than just being. “For life.”
My reasons may be just "a mere side argument that has been brought up to appeal to emotion,” but it’s reasonable.
Furthermore, has “Michel Foucault” cornered the market on logic? Are ALL other thoughts just mere “side arguments” with no validity or logic?
News Flash Dazed: "Appeal to emotion” arguments can also be logical and are many times more powerful than sanctimonious, high flown, antiseptic “thoughts.”
Just look at most cases involving a jury! A smart lawyer knows when to “appeal to emotion” and when to impress people with abstract concepts and philosophies.
Nevertheless, good to see you putting to use what you are learning in College. When are you due to graduate?
Cheers
This is a reasonable argument/question.
I think you misinterpret that statement… it is based on the spirit of the law, it’s not literal. Furthermore it’s not saying to let “100 men go in order to find an innocent.” It’s saying better to let some guilty go free than to take away the liberty of an innocent man.
Don’t forget the founding fathers were concerned with liberty/freedom. The freedom to govern, to tax, to worship, etc. This is why the revolution took place against the British in the 18th Century. That’s why the Bill of Right’s/ Constitution is concerned with things like, Right to speedy trial, confrontation of witnesses and Double Jeopardy, etc.
More specifically double jeopardy like speedy trial was concerned with innocent people being harassed, cases being prolonged by the state, and liberties being usurped by the state.
For all the problems with the U.S. Judicial system, the Bill of Rights was the first document in the history of a nation that allowed DETAILED rights to the average person on such a large scale. It is looked at as a Hallmark document and is imitated in one form or another by many other countries since.
It’s amazing how the ending of life can be justified by various means, all of which do not address the taking of a life which is completely helpless. Many pro-life people donate to charities which help these kids, and many are willing to adopt. How about giving the child a chance at life instead of deciding for them it’s not worth it for them to live, and killing them outright? We don’t live in a perfect world, and most of these children will be born with the cards stacked against them. So I guess instead of working on those social issues, it’s easier to kill.
We are at the point now were the reasoning for an abortion is simply that a child is “inconvenient”. The culture of death is in full swing.
Replace “emotion” with Faith. Studying the logic of the Theology of Life will help people form a better conscious on the issue. I know that this point of view is unpopular, for those courageous enough to check it out, some excellent theological documents exists explaining the logic. Those interested can find it here:
www.vatican.va
Appealing to religious faith can be compelling if one believes in the theology it is based on and its relevance thereof…
Good post. I can see where you’re coming from. However, just as robin suggests we need to teach our kids to accept responsibility for their actions, as society we need to take responsibility for creating these monstrosites. Yeah there are going to be sick bastards out there, but by and large most crime (including murder) is a product of society, and is getting worse as we pretend that band aid solutions are the way to go … fix the problem.