17
   

Killing people is the best solution.

 
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Jan, 2009 05:03 am
@okie,
okie wrote:

Quote:
Very insightful post, David.

U r very kind


Quote:
I think the problem has intensified
since pop culture has portrayed sex as a recreation first,
not primarily for pro-creation.

Which problem do u have in mind ?



Quote:

I do not believe that two people in love that are committed
to each other in marriage are going to despise the symbol
of their love, their child, and kill it.

I imagine that u will get something of a bell-curved distribution,
or other shaped distribution. I deny that thay will ALL see
the situation the same way. There r many people with many
different opinions, some of whom agree with u.




Quote:
That is not a normal thing to do,
it doesn't seem logical to me.

I suspect that u r correct,
that it is not the statistical norm.
Whether it is LOGICAL depends upon evaluation
of several factors, some of which I will discuss hereinbelow.






Quote:

It would be akin to killing themselves, symbolically and in reality.

From that thought, I must respectfully dissent.
Some people (like me, for instance) are very pleased
to have NO children n don 't wish to lose that freedom
and protection.
I am pleased to NOT have someone lurking around
who stands to profit from my demise,
which will be MORE profitable, the SOONER it happens;
i.e., being a parent has a built-in conflict of interest.
(For instance, I recently read of a guy convicted of contracting
a hit on his brother because he had hit the lottery, and the convict
had hoped for an inheritance; that applies to children too.)

Each time I see a patricide in the news,
I am very pleased and satisfied to know that regardless of other
hazzards, at least I am safe from THAT.
He can 't take me out, if he was never born in the first place.

The absence of the financial expenses of a child or children
(including health maintenance and full education)
will aggregate to my benefit; I get to enjoy my own property,
and unlike income, savings are not taxable.

Additionally, if I had a wife whom I loved,
SHE woud be safe from his greed too,
and she 'd not have had to endure pains of childbirth.

To those considerations, I 'll add the following:
there is a potential for differences of personality
that can be irritating, on a long-term basis.
Altho I had a peaceful relationship with my own father,
we did not see eye-to-eye; we had radically different values & tastes.
I am a greedy conservative Republican; he was a stingy Roosevelt Democrat.

I 'd feel bad to know or suspect
that after my demise, my estate woud be applied
to purposes that I philosophically oppose, but that my son might support.
It woud not be enuf to emplace prohibitions in my will;
that woud not be effective. I really LIKE having no children.


David
Eorl
 
  2  
Reply Sat 3 Jan, 2009 06:07 am
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:

Eorl,
I surmise that your opposition to capital punishment
is that the criminals whom we woud thereby kill are HUMAN --
i.e., that for some unexplained reason, HUMANs
shoud be immune from the death penalty, merely because
thay belong to the same species as the victim.

I challenge that.
If a human commits an offense, then it becomes appropriate
for the victim thereof or his designee (government or someone else,
if government defaults in its duty)
to avenge the victim -- to get even for him.

THAT is the reason that we created government;
(that and repelling enemy raids or invasions).

David


There are a few faulty steps of reasoning here.

The most obvious is that you wrongly assume all people want, expect, deserve and have an inborn right to "vengeance". You may think so, but it is an opinion. I think they have have a right to life above all other rights (given that I see all rights as ultimately arbitrary anyway). The United Nations (since 1948) and two-thirds of the countries of the world see it my way. I know that's partly an ad populi, but I'm just pointing out that I'm not being weirdly radical about that. (Naturally, I won't be shocked to see some Americans outraged at my suggestion that there could be an authority outside their own domestic government.)

Next you assume the reasons for the existence of government are the reasons you are prepared to tolerate one. In fact governments exist for a vast variety of reasons, depending on whether you live in Monaco or Iran.

As for the species protectionist argument, it's partly true but understates the reasoning. I'm a humanist but I don't think sharks should be executed for their kills either. It's kind of moot point though because there are those who argue that respect for human life is their argument for CP.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Jan, 2009 06:48 am
@Eorl,
Quote:
Naturally, I won't be shocked to see some Americans outraged at my suggestion that there could be an authority outside their own domestic government.


As it happens, i tend to agree with your view on the death penalty.

But i get awfully damned tired of **** like this. I suspect that there are a good many Australians who would be outraged by a suggestion that there might be an authority outside their own domestic authority which had a superior claim.

It really gets tedious to hear that Americans have no sense of humor, that Americans have no culture, that Americans don't understand irony, that Americans are narrow-minded and provincial. So, by god, are a hell of a lot of other people in the world.

You do your argument no favor by taking cheap shots like that, which lower your argument to level of elementary school invective.
Eorl
 
  2  
Reply Sat 3 Jan, 2009 08:51 am
@Setanta,
We've been here before of course, and you'll note that I've modified my previously used "most Americans" and replaced it with "some Americans" and that would be thanks to you. Give me credit for progress?

Look, I really believe that "some Americans" don't really think the United Nations charter on human rights is as dear to them as their own democracy and constitution, in fact it doesn't even factor into the argument much.

American nationalism (and individual American State loyalty) is very strong, and that brings weakness as well as strength. (I am somewhat anti-nationalist, but not the least bit racist)
okie
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Jan, 2009 01:09 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
David, I enjoy your posts, they are fascinating in regard to their honesty, etc. I don't know if I answer all of your questions or not, but one was in regard to the "problem," you asked what was it. It is the problem of abortion, the issue that it presents to society. With a higher moral standard practiced, the issue would be much smaller and easier to manage, and it would be less of an issue politically.

In regard to some of your other opinions and risks involved, life is a risk, love is a risk, having children is a risk, and not only do they have associated risks, but they have high rewards as well as disappointments, and to successfully negotiate life takes alot of work and commitment. You of course know all of this, but just expressing some thoughts here.

Thanks for your opinions.
okie
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Jan, 2009 01:14 pm
@Eorl,
Eorl wrote:

We've been here before of course, and you'll note that I've modified my previously used "most Americans" and replaced it with "some Americans" and that would be thanks to you. Give me credit for progress?

Look, I really believe that "some Americans" don't really think the United Nations charter on human rights is as dear to them as their own democracy and constitution, in fact it doesn't even factor into the argument much.

American nationalism (and individual American State loyalty) is very strong, and that brings weakness as well as strength. (I am somewhat anti-nationalist, but not the least bit racist)

I agree with Setanta to an extent, although not with the same language. I think as an American I am more or less tired of the intellectuals of the world looking down their noses at Americans. Yes, we are highly imperfect, but I prefer our standards over that of the corrupt U.N. And nationalism, speaking for myself, it is not blindly married to whatever our leaders do, we are highly varied in our opinions here, but most of us are very loyal to our roots of constitutional principles, which I think trump the U.N.

Last but not least, do not swallow what the media presents you in regard to what we are about here. The liberal media is a total failure in my opinion.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Jan, 2009 01:22 pm
@Eorl,
Eorl, several nations of the European Union (such as it is) opted for full participation with the union parliament at Strasbourg (is that where it still sits?), the currency, the end of border control, etc.--by executive order of the sitting governments. But there were nations which opted for a plebiscite, and in Denmark and Ireland, the measure was defeated by the electorate. You have referred to a world court, and a perceived reluctance on the part of Americans to participate. So i ask you if you can state with confidence that the electorate of the nations who participate by executive order of their sitting governments would have approved participation as readily as their governments have done.

Can you state with certainty that a majority of Australians consider the United Nations charter on human rights to take precedence over their own laws and constitution? Can you state with certainty that this is true of the majority of nations in the world?

My objection is that you single out the United States for its nationalism, but don't seem to spend much time commenting on, say, Russia or China, both large, powerful nations in which nationalism is prominent, even to the degree of engendering racist attitudes. If you were as careful to note the tendencies which you despise in other nations as you are in the case of the United States, i'd really have no beef. I don't for a moment doubt that racism is common in Australia (even if the majority of the population are not racist), nor that the majority of Australians are nationalists to one extent or another.

(EDIT: Please note, also, that my beef was based on the comment being egregious, unnecessary to the response you were writing--it was a cheap shot.)
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Jan, 2009 01:36 pm
By the way, yes we have been down this road before, and yes, you have mended your ways. If i were to object every time i saw some yob (a group in which i do not include you) making anti-American remarks, i'd probably spend my time doing nothing else while here. There are many virulently anti-American members who post here, and they are not in the least amenable to accepting an upbraiding for it from me. I consider you, however, to be not simply intelligent and sophisticated in your knowledge of the world, but able to acknowledge a fault on your part--probably more able to make such an acknowledgement than i am myself. So if i object to that sort of remark on your part, it's not that i'm necessarily picking on you, but rather that i think it is possible to sanely and decorously discuss it with you, as i don't think is usually possible with the members here who are virulently anti-American.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Jan, 2009 04:05 pm
@Eorl,
Eorl wrote:

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Eorl,
I surmise that your opposition to capital punishment
is that the criminals whom we woud thereby kill are HUMAN --
i.e., that for some unexplained reason, HUMANs
shoud be immune from the death penalty, merely because
thay belong to the same species as the victim.

I challenge that.
If a human commits an offense, then it becomes appropriate
for the victim thereof or his designee (government or someone else,
if government defaults in its duty)
to avenge the victim -- to get even for him.

THAT is the reason that we created government;
(that and repelling enemy raids or invasions).

David


Quote:
There are a few faulty steps of reasoning here.

The most obvious is that you wrongly assume all people want,
expect, deserve and have an inborn right to "vengeance".

Close, but no cigar.
A victim of abuse is invested with a right to get even
(i.e., vengeance) upon the occurrence of that abuse, not before.





Quote:
You may think so, but it is an opinion.

Yes; its my opinion that its cold at the North Pole, too.



Quote:
I think they have have a right to life above all other rights
(given that I see all rights as ultimately arbitrary anyway).

I dispute that there are gradations or degrees of having a right
to anything. Anyway, tho thay certainly had that right
BEFORE committing the offense in question, thay can FORFEIT that right,
and also during perpetration of the offense itself,
those ritghts are in a state of forfeiture, subject to the defensive rights of the victim.



Quote:

The United Nations (since 1948) and two-thirds of the countries
of the world see it my way. I know that's partly an ad populi,
but I'm just pointing out that I'm not being weirdly radical about that.
(Naturally, I won't be shocked to see some Americans outraged
at my suggestion that there could be an authority outside their
own domestic government.)

Naturally, I join in such outraged rejection and deny any existence thereof.
Note also that I have no respect for the United Nations.





Quote:

Next you assume the reasons for the existence of government
are the reasons you are prepared to tolerate one. In fact
governments exist for a vast variety of reasons,
depending on whether you live in Monaco or Iran.

I was just arguing from John Locke 's "State of Nature".


0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Jan, 2009 04:23 pm
@okie,
okie wrote:


Quote:

David, I enjoy your posts, they are fascinating in regard to their honesty, etc.

Thank u


Quote:
I don't know if I answer all of your questions or not, but one was
in regard to the "problem," you asked what was it. It is the problem of abortion,
the issue that it presents to society.

With a higher moral standard practiced, the issue would be
much smaller and easier to manage, and it would be less of an issue politically.

I am first and last an Individualist, libertarian, anti-societarian,
keenly aware that society (as its name implies) is created by
that association of INDIVIDUALS, in the absence of whose affiliation,
society woud not exist; therefore: society is the baby,
the child of the Individuals by whom it is created,
and society shoud look up to its creators like gods,
honored to worship at their feet.

As Individuals, we need to be aware that our purpose in creating
society is for IT to SERVE US, not the other way around.





David
0 Replies
 
Eorl
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Jan, 2009 06:31 am
@aidan,
aidan wrote:

I agree with that too - and I don't think there's anything wrong with seeking retribution or justice when a wrongful act has been committed. I do also think, and actually take comfort in the fact that innocent people (if you don't want to use the word 'society') are then somewhat safer than they would have been if the perpetrator had been set free to go back out on the streets.

But I'm really conflicted about the whole issue- and moreso lately than I used to be. I used to know 100% that I was anti-capital punishment. And I think that I still am - but I've really started to question my definite anti stance on purely moral grounds.

I'm still anti-capital punishment as it has historically been implemented in the US. I do think it's a discriminatory and racistly employed method of punishment and I abhor it for those reasons-still. And I don't think it can ever be fairly and equitably administered in the US until all life is deemed equally valuable - and I think we're still a long way away from that happening.

But as I've been working with people in prisons, some of whom have murdered people, I've really been struck by the thought or sense that I've gotten that their criminal behavior is, in some instances, a compulsion. Yes, totally unplanned and in the heat of the moment. That's what makes it even scarier - and less able for them to control. If they'd been able to control it in the first place - they wouldn't have done these things.
And someone can take all the anger management classes that are available, but if they're either innately prone to, or even have been conditioned by environmental factors (such as these people who were religiously fanatical) to react to stress or perceived wrongs by striking out against other people, or to take justice into their own hands, or even more scarily, to achieve a sense of release or relief which is true of of sexually violent deviants, I just don't see that changing very much.

And it's with real sadness I say this. This is something I've learned in the last two years from working with some of these people. This guy I talked to right before Christmas who's in prison for murder told me he'd been passed by for parole again. He said he would not admit to the details of the murder - he admits murdering the person to the state, and to me, and to anyone who asks- but he won't admit to the details of how the state says he murdered the person- and this is holding up his parole.
Which is a good thing because as we talked, he started talking about his wish to have a relationship with someone when he got out of prison (not with me...with a nonspecific woman somewhere) and he said he hoped that he could find a woman who would not get jealous or make him jealous because he knew that that's what ALL women did and...blah...blah...blah...and I thought - he'll get out and he'll do the same **** again- and he's been in prison for thirty-odd years.

Some people are just really, really damaged. I don't know how or why - but I do know they shouldn't be walking around free. And if you've ever spent time working in a prison of ANY sort - much less a prison for maximum offenders who have murdered someone or are pedophiles...you'd know that's not the answer for their rehabilitation.
Because there's nothing for these people there, and there's nothing for them when/if they get out. Their families have abandoned them. They're put in hostels with other drug users and murderers and pedophiles...they still have their inappropriate urges and their inability to control their impulses- but now they don't have food or shelter (as in prison).
And we wonder why they reoffend.
Sometimes, I really do think it's more merciful to help them end it.
And if you talk to people in prison - those who are not accused of capital crimes themselves (and so don't have to worry about it) are very often in favor of capital punishment.
One guy said to me -'he shouldn't have killed someone if he didn't want to get nailed...it wasn't nice for him to do that'....and he smiled as he said it.

I don't know what the answer is- but I don't think it's as cut and dried as I used to think it was.



Thank you aidan, this is a great response, very honest and considered, from someone in a position to see at least some of the reality of this issue. I don't really want to argue with your opinion, because you've held a similar view as me and you aren't in the market to re-purchase!

Having said that....

I don't think retribution is a good thing at all. Some areas of the world are in constant conflict because retribution is such an integral part of their culture. There are plenty of people who forgive murderers and rapists and move on. There are others who feel deprived of retribution when the criminal gets the easy way out through death.

I would agree that helping them end it would be more humane. I'm all for a well considered carefully managed voluntary euthansia of hard criminals. That's a whole other thing than killing them against their will.

I get what you are saying about the incurable violent criminals. I can imagine some really horrific punishments that would prevent re-offending and possibly act as better deterrent. You could amputate an arm, a leg, and genitalia for instance. That's pretty harsh, I admit, but at least they still exist. At least they are still in a position to react to what has been done to them, and that feels to me like an absolute minimum right...to have an awareness of having been punished.

Somehow, we seem to have reached this strange situation where our prisons focus on humanitarian treatment, clean food, water, health care and every attempt at rehabilitation, training, education and eventual release, or....hmmm, no, death for this one. Why this huge gap? I'm not really for amputating limbs, but I'll take it in place of amputating heads any day.
I just don't get the massive jump.

I have this completely untested theory that there would be a strong correlation between those who support CP and those who believe in a some kind of reckoning or balancing in an afterlife. I believe the expression is "kill them all and let god sort them out".
Eorl
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Jan, 2009 07:07 am
@Setanta,
Thanks for your support Setanta, I really appreciate it. (and I'm not being sarcastic)

As usual, you are pretty much right on all counts, and I can't demonstrate the certainties you asked for.

I can say that my purpose was not so much a cheap shot, but I wanted the (I assume) Americans I was discussing the issue with to consider the argument beyond the confines of the US Constitution, and as you can see the point was understood well enough and even met with the unapologetic expected response by some.

As for Australians, it's actually a commonly held belief that we don't have a constitution (we do, no bill of rights though) but I'm guessing that most would see the United Nations human rights laws as higher and more important than our own. For example, when our own government commits acts that may conflict with UN law (such as invading Iraq with the US), we get annoyed about it. We see ourselves as a small piece of a much bigger, more powerful world (because it's basically true), whereas I think Americans see themselves as the center of the world, certainly of the "free world" (also because it's basically true) and that works against looking outside the US for guidance, moral or otherwise.

I'm generalizing again, aren't I? Damn it, just can't shake these prejudices!
aidan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Jan, 2009 07:09 am
@Eorl,
Quote:
Thank you aidan, this is a great response, very honest and considered, from someone in a position to see at least some of the reality of this issue. I don't really want to argue with your opinion, because you've held a similar view as me and you aren't in the market to re-purchase!

What was interesting to me was that after I wrote that and then began the back and forth conversation with Okie - I realized I was still in the default mode of arguing against capital punishment - because that really is my natural inclination.
I really don't believe in evening scores - but as a woman with children in this world, I do want to be able to feel safe - so I have no issue at all with dangerous people being punished for their crimes and put somewhere where they can't hurt anyone else.

I said that it was with sadness that I started realizing some things after I'd observed for a while and it was and still is - to the point that I don't know if I can continue my work with these offenders anymore.
When I started, I really, really believed that a difference could be made for them, and rehabilitation was possible.
Now I'm not so sure and it depresses the hell out of me - because if I did think it was all a matter of societal reform and prison reform - I'd have some hope- but as I said, it's finally gotten through my thick skull I think that some people just can't be helped to change...and believe it or not that's new to me and it does really, really depress me.

Because I don't know what the answer is in terms of what can then be done with/for them. And in some cases, I don't think there is a viable and humane answer.

What we're doing right now isn't working. Not for them and not for our society.

When I said maybe it'd be more merciful to help them end it - what I meant was that contrary to what's depicted , a lot of times these guys aren't sitting there rubbing their hand together looking forward to the next victim with unfettered glee.
It really is a compulsion - torturous in some instances - like those who wash their hands and get relief of some sort - but until the moment they give in and wash their hands again, they're constantly and frantically struggling against the urge to do that.
Every minute of their lives. Can you imagine? I can't. I think I'd rather that someone just help me make it all be over.

This whole subject is really interesting to me, and I think I've come full circle in terms of my thinking. When I started out teaching- I was working with developmentally at risk infants and toddlers. Then I started teaching highschool, then adult offenders - but when I think of where the effort needs to be - I'm back to thinking we need to change things for these people from the ground up - from infancy.
So many offenders have suffered abuse and are functionally illiterate - there's an amazingly strong correlation.

I don't think anything will change until we change some of the realities in our society (I'm talking about America - and England here-those are the two societal and prison systems I've observed personally) that continue to foster illiteracy and hopelessness and all the rest of it.

In terms of amputations...I can't picture that. I really do like these guys - when I was working at the prison and I saw someone without a coat when it was cold outside- that was hard enough to watch for me.
I really did mean it when I said that sometimes I think the death penalty is a kindness. I'm really not into watching people suffer - even if they're people who would watch or cause other people to suffer. That's just not my thing.

I do believe however - that they should be stopped from hurting other people somehow.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Jan, 2009 12:50 pm
COMING FULL CIRCLE:
Faze 1 of 3:
In my early years and thru most of my life,
I 've favored the death penalty for murder
or such heinous crimes as the Rosenbergs.
My predominant reason for supporting capital
punishment was malice; my desire for vengeance
upon those predators whose misconduct merits it.
Government exists to help victims get even.

Faze 2 of 3:
For the last 2 years or so,
I had some doubts about that.
It occurred to me that the death penalty
was a rather brief event. The more severe
aspect of it was the fear in the condemned
before sentence is executed upon him.
Accordingly, I earnestly considered the
possibility that malice n vengeance woud be more
fully and successfully executed upon him,
if he were ALIVE to experience the discomfort thereof:
life in a very uncomfortable prison.

Faze 3 of 3:
Recently, I saw a prizoner on TV who had been incarcerated
for many years for an egregious offense. He made himself
at home in a comfortable prison, with large, beautiful lawns,
athletic games, etc. He was released after his sentence
and went out and committed another horrific crime
or a multiplicity thereof. He was sentenced to more years
of prison time and he EXULTED in being back AT HOME.

I have reinstated my earlier approval of the death penalty.






For violent crimes that did not rise to the level
of deserving the death penalty, I support BANISHMENT
from the North American Continent, after their imprisonment,
with their being admonished that the death penalty will be
executed upon them if thay violate the Banishment,
by sneaking back in here. Violent recividists shoud not
be released back into decent society,
the same way that a medical technician after kidney dialysis
does not put the dirt back into his patient 's blood.
0 Replies
 
Eorl
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jan, 2009 07:35 am
@okie,
okie wrote:

...I find it bizarre to oppose capital punishment, while at the same time sanctioning killing the unborn...


I find it bizarre that you find that bizarre.

I find it bizarre to oppose killing life just because it's "life" while supporting killing people. You must think of yourself as Pro-Most-Life.

That said, I'd rather not turn this into yet another abortion thread.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jan, 2009 08:20 am
@Eorl,
Quote:
As for Australians, it's actually a commonly held belief that we don't have a constitution (we do, no bill of rights though) but I'm guessing that most would see the United Nations human rights laws as higher and more important than our own. For example, when our own government commits acts that may conflict with UN law (such as invading Iraq with the US), we get annoyed about it. We see ourselves as a small piece of a much bigger, more powerful world (because it's basically true), whereas I think Americans see themselves as the center of the world, certainly of the "free world" (also because it's basically true) and that works against looking outside the US for guidance, moral or otherwise.


This surprises me, i'd not have thought that Australians would actually have considered the UN Charter to be more important to them than their own law. I consider that Howard got away with tagging along on the Iraq misadventure because of powers inherent in the Westminster system which allow a PM to get away with things like that without the same oversight that our system requires (and which nevertheless failed in our case).

You have a good point about the origins of the world view of Americans and of the citizens of other nations, though, and i'm content to stipulate that.
0 Replies
 
Robert Gentel
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Mar, 2009 12:55 am
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/correlation.png
Eorl
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Mar, 2009 03:39 am
@Robert Gentel,
Very Happy Laughing
0 Replies
 
HesDeltanCaptain
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Aug, 2015 08:47 am
@Eorl,
Until we accept facts like Christianity causes social violence, we're going to continue to have a violence problem. To learn about this in a scientific cross-cultural analytical way, read this papaer published in the 70s. Fully documented how religion denies pleasure and animals and people both when denied pleasure express violence:

http://www.whale.to/a/prescott3.html#Religious_Roots__

"Body Pleasure and the Origins of Violence"
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Too crazy to be executed? - Discussion by joefromchicago
A case to end the death penalty - Discussion by gungasnake
The least cruel method of execution? - Discussion by pistoff
Death Penalty Drugs - Question by HesDeltanCaptain
Cyanide Pill - Question by gollum
 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 08/18/2019 at 11:44:53