102 replies to this topic

[Fabbrizio]

Yeah, let them disagree. Doesn't change a thing about my opinion though. By my book no human has the right to end the life of another human. And that's why no one should. Period.

Never said it was right to kill anyone, I'm just saying that there are things more evil than simply killing someone.

[Sheik]

Never said it was right to kill anyone, I'm just saying that there are things more evil than simply killing someone.

Hm. I disagree. Taking the life of another human is the ultimate evil by my book. (Mentally healthy) humans wish to live more than anything else. And wouldn't you rather get tortured than killed? If your life's taken, it's taken. It's over. But if you survive any cruel torture you still live.

[Fabbrizio]

Hm. I disagree. Taking the life of another human is the ultimate evil by my book. (Mentally healthy) humans wish to live more than anything else. And wouldn't you rather get tortured than killed? If your life's taken, it's taken. It's over. But if you survive any cruel torture you still live.

See, I guess that's where our ideals split. I value my well-being more than I value my life.

[Sheik]

Sheik91 depends who you are. Or even how you get tortured. It could be humiliating, alot of torturers out there are sickos and mainly most people who torture kill afterwards. You should watch the movie "The Collector" great torture film, a man is robbing a house and theres a massive dude toruting all the people in there and he's set traps all over the house he escapes but then he finds the little girl in the house hiding from the man and he goes back, it's cool the way the bad guy becomes the good guy in the end Great movie I think and you notice the torturer kills all the people after he's done his buisness, so there's no evidence. (Well there's always some left behind unless your a genius).

Thank you for the advice, but I will keep relying on empiristic research rather than on motion pictures.
I can agree on the "depends who you are" part though, which is why I made that emphasizes on the mental state of the person in question. A mentally healthy person will hold it's life dear.

Edit: @PowerGauntlets: In theory, I'm not even too far from agreeing. But in a real situation I know that my will to survive will most likely take over.

Edited by Sheik91, 31 July 2011 - 12:08 PM.

[Sheik]

This is barely on topic anymore, actually.
The effects of torture might most likely have an impact on the mental health of the victim. To wish to end your life is no healthy or natural behavior. There has to be something seriously screwed up with your psyche to wish so. (That said, I have no problems with screwd psyche. Mine's partially fairly screwed, too, I'm quite sure. Also, I have no gruge against people that kill themselves. But I refuse to call it a healthy behavior.)
I don't know what I'd want. The one thing I know, is that I'd want to live (most likely) and probably forget, too. But you can spin those scenarios into eternity, it's beyond the point.
I wouldn't generalize so much on "the torturer". I don't want to speculate on his motives, either. I agree, however, that it's quite an understandable behavior to try and cover up after comitting a crime.

Edited by Sheik91, 31 July 2011 - 04:45 PM.

[Rover]

Disregarding anything already said in this thread, I wouldn't. Some people in my neighborhood really are dicks, but just because of that I wouldn't kill them. They haven't done anything to even slightly deserve it, there will be people you dislike everywhere, just get over it. And I don't get angry real easily either I guess.

[SpacemanDan]

I'm sure I have the capacity to kill people, mentally speaking! I just don't want to unless the circumstances are absolutely extreme. Like, immediate self-defense or defense of a loved one. Otherwise, it would completely go against any moral code I have. I think that's what most people mean. Right?

Yeah, that's a really good way to sum it up to me. But if it was just mano a mano, I wouldn't be able to do it. Plus, I'd get my derrière kicked before I could do anything. XD I'm more likely to beat myself up before I even try to beat someone else up.

(Also, huzzah for using random bits of other languages. XD)

[NoeL]

I never said anything about as a punishment. You're talking to someone who has little to no faith in the justice system. Whenever I see a murderer, or just a psychopath in general, I think to myself how much better things would turn out if some pissed-off renegade would kill them before the government could put them in prison.

But that's the same thing, and I STILL disagree with you. Why do you want them dead rather than in prison? Because you think they deserve the same thing to be reciprocated? Eye for an eye - that sort of thing? There's a word for that: revenge. I don't subscribe to it, personally.

[Russ]

Well on that subject, the way I see it, it's all about the punishment fitting the crime. Let's say a man kidnaps a young girl, rapes her, then murders her. Yeah, you can throw him in jail for life, and he won't be able to do it again. But that misses the point. What he did was horrible, and violated the girl's basic right to life. His punishment should fit the crime: He denied the girl a life, we deny him his.

In addition, sad as it is, there are people who fight to get these kind of criminals OUT of prison. Dead men can't be paroled. Might sound a bit cruel, but all too often horrible criminals have been let loose to kill again. Remove them from existence, and the problem's no longer there.

[Fabbrizio]

Well on that subject, the way I see it, it's all about the punishment fitting the crime. Let's say a man kidnaps a young girl, rapes her, then murders her. Yeah, you can throw him in jail for life, and he won't be able to do it again. But that misses the point. What he did was horrible, and violated the girl's basic right to life. His punishment should fit the crime: He denied the girl a life, we deny him his.

NoeL has it right, though, that IS Hammurabi. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.

In addition, sad as it is, there are people who fight to get these kind of criminals OUT of prison. Dead men can't be paroled. Might sound a bit cruel, but all too often horrible criminals have been let loose to kill again. Remove them from existence, and the problem's no longer there.

This, on the other hand, is much closer to the point I was trying to make.

Edited by PowerGauntlets, 01 August 2011 - 06:43 AM.

[NoeL]

Well on that subject, the way I see it, it's all about the punishment fitting the crime. Let's say a man kidnaps a young girl, rapes her, then murders her. Yeah, you can throw him in jail for life, and he won't be able to do it again. But that misses the point. What he did was horrible, and violated the girl's basic right to life. His punishment should fit the crime: He denied the girl a life, we deny him his.

In my opinion THAT is what misses the point. A girl was raped and murdered - it's tragic, and irreversible. I'm sure you've heard the phrase "It's no use crying over spilled milk" - what's done is done, it can't be undone, and you need to accept the fact and move forward. Killing the guy that did it just makes two people dead instead of one. It solves nothing and simply adds to the death toll, and I'm sure you can agree that human life shouldn't be hastily discarded. The "eye for an eye" approach is nothing but revenge to satisfy your own bloodlust. You'd do good to recall what Jesus taught about those that strike you on the right cheek (hint: it wasn't "strike them back").

In addition, sad as it is, there are people who fight to get these kind of criminals OUT of prison. Dead men can't be paroled. Might sound a bit cruel, but all too often horrible criminals have been let loose to kill again. Remove them from existence, and the problem's no longer there.

If the horrible criminal in question has recognised the error of their ways, feels remorse for his victim, has no desire to repeat their crime and have passed all psychiatric tests that show he's unlikely to relapse, what purpose does it serve for them to be dead or imprisoned? At that stage, you are forcing them to pay with their life because of your own reluctance to forgive their mistakes. Again, what does Jesus say about forgiveness?

If an atheist like myself can recognise and get behind Jesus' ethics then you, as a Christian, have no excuse. To quote Ghandi: "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ".

EDIT: typo

Edited by NoeL, 01 August 2011 - 07:15 AM.

[Fabbrizio]

If the horrible criminal in question has recognised the error of their ways, feels remorse for his victim, has no desire to repeat their crime and have passed all psychiatric tests that show he's unlikely to relapse, what purpose does it serve for them to be dead or imprisoned? At that stage, you are forcing them to pay with their life because of your own reluctance to forgive their mistakes. Again, what does Jesus say about forgiveness?

While I'd love to agree with this point, I must add that this is where it becomes case-by-case. Not all criminals would take back their actions and repent.