Personal v Public

@Ghost-of-a-Duke

There are certainly counter-arguments to be had, e.g.

- Why should society pay to house, clothe and feed a person who, by intent, will never be allowed to participate in normal society again?
- The surest way to stop a killer from killing again is execution. Although rare, people have been able to escape from prisons before. But one more killing by someone we know to be a killer is one killing too many.
- I think we require some arguments from you as to why capital punishment is not just. One could argue (and I do) that a serial killer owes his own life, at a minimum, for all the lives taken. It gives a sense of closure to the families of the victims, which you may label 'revenge' - fair enough; maybe it is. However, I am unwilling to judge someone who has lost a loved one to a violent crime, since I have not experienced that myself. I think it's easy for people to say, in a cold academic-style setting, that victims shouldn't seek vengeance. It would be very hard for some of the victims not to desire vengeance. A social contract [live and let live] has been viciously broken by another. Breaking of such contracts is a threat to the peace of a society, and deserves to be taken quite seriously.

@bigdoggproblem said
@Ghost-of-a-Duke

There are certainly counter-arguments to be had, e.g.

- Why should society pay to house, clothe and feed a person who, by intent, will never be allowed to participate in normal society again?
- The surest way to stop a killer from killing again is execution. Although rare, people have been able to escape from prisons before. But one more killing ...[text shortened]... g of such contracts is a threat to the peace of a society, and deserves to be taken quite seriously.

I will begin with two opening gambits:

1. What if the executed person turns out to be innocent? (One occurrence of this would be morally unacceptable). You have already negated the reply of 'rarity' as this didn't prevent you executing a killer who might go on to kill again.
2. We diminish our own humanity by collectively ending the life of another, even if that person is the worst example of humanity. If we want to live in a world where killing is wrong, then we can not excuse ourselves from this due to expenditure reasons and the expense of keeping them in prison.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
"Vengeance is Mine; I will repay, says the Lord.” - Are you God?

Counter quote: "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man."

Capital punishment is not "vengeance". It's justice.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
The only irrationality is to hold the simultaneous beliefs that abortion is wrong but capital punishment is ok.

That is where your argument fails.

There's nothing rational about equating the murder of an innocent child with the execution of a hardened criminal.

@secondson said
Counter quote: "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man."

Capital punishment is not "vengeance". It's justice.

“God will bring into judgment both the righteous and the wicked, for there will be a time for every activity, a time to judge every deed.” Ecclesiastes 3:17

@secondson said
That is where your argument fails.

There's nothing rational about equating the murder of an innocent child with the execution of a hardened criminal.

What if that hardened criminal you executed turns out to be innocent?


Carlos DeLuna was executed in Texas in December 1989 for stabbing a gas station clerk to death. Subsequent investigations cast strong doubt upon DeLuna's guilt for the murder of which he had been convicted. His execution came about six years after the crime was committed. The trial ended up attracting local attention, but it was never suggested that an innocent man was about to be punished while the actual killer went free. DeLuna was found blocks away from the crime scene with $149 in his pocket. From that point on, it went downhill for the young Carlos DeLuna. A wrongful eyewitness testimony is what formed the case against him. Unfortunately, DeLuna's previous criminal record was very much used against him. The real killer, Carlos Hernandez, was a repeat violent offender who actually had a history of slashing women with his unique buck knife, not to mention he looked very similar to Carlos DeLuna. Hernandez did not keep quiet about his murder; apparently he went around bragging about the killing of Lopez. In 1999, Hernandez was imprisoned for attacking his neighbor with a knife. (Wiki).

@Ghost-of-a-Duke
Point #1 I consider to be the strongest argument against capital punishment. Nevertheless, I feel the occurrences of this are rare, and the safeguards built into the system adequate to give the accused a chance, even if sometimes they fail.

Also, I consider the gain of sparing an innocent man's life to be smaller than it first appears, since he'll likely serve life in prison anyway [which is not much of a life; no matter how well you treat a prisoner, you cannot make up for the loss of freedom]. I think the gain of stopping career killers dead in their tracks [excuse the pun] outweighs the above.

Point 2 is quite vague. What does "diminish our humanity" actually mean?

Take the movie Old Yeller. Did it diminish Travis as a human when he had to kill his own dog? Almost certainly, yes. Did it need to be done? Also, yes. The dog could not be allowed to continue to suffer. I think this argument transfers well to the execution of killers. They are mentally damaged, because only a mentally damaged person can deliberately take the life of an innocent. The world in which no one's humanity is ever diminished is Utopian, and impractical. It's a dirty job, but someone needs to do it.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
I will begin with two opening gambits:

1. What if the executed person turns out to be innocent? (One occurrence of this would be morally unacceptable). You have already negated the reply of 'rarity' as this didn't prevent you executing a killer who might go on to kill again.
2. We diminish our own humanity by collectively ending the life of another, even if that p ...[text shortened]... not excuse ourselves from this due to expenditure reasons and the expense of keeping them in prison.

A study undertaken by the Geneva Declaration on Armed Violence and Development estimated that there were approximately 490,000 intentional homicides in 2004." Wiki

"On average, 56 million abortions occurred worldwide each year in 2010–2014. This is an increase from
50 million annually in 1990–1994, resulting primarily from population growth.

"Nearly 7 million women in developing countries are treated for complications from unsafe abortions annually, and at least 22,000 die from abortion-related complications every year." WHO

It is estimated that, in the U.S., 4.1% of inmates on death row are actually innocent, that's about 1 out of twenty five.

"In 2018, the US murder rate was 5.0 per 100,000, for a total of 15,498 murders." Wiki

"The figures show the “clearance rate,” the percentage of property and violent crimes that are resolved in an arrest or other means by police — essentially, cops' solve rates for crime. The numbers are bad across the board. For murder, the clearance rate is 61.6 percent. For aggravated assault, it's 53.3 percent. There's a 40 percent chance you'll get away with murder in America."

Statistically, abortion is a holocaust. Or perhaps we can merely shrug it off as a consequence of natural selection. That is, if man is just an animal, then it's just survival of the fittest.

"The way of a fool is right in his own eyes: but he that hearkeneth unto counsel is wise."
"Every way of a man is right in his own eyes: but the LORD pondereth the hearts." Proverbs

@secondson said
Do you know what premeditated murder is?

Is it first or second degree?

I take it you'd want to see abortion prosecuted as first degree murder.

So, would support women who have abortions being executed?

Or would you support prison sentences?

And if so, how many years minimum/maximum?

@secondson said
If you're asking me if I support capital punishment the answer is yes.

Are there any other actions - aside from abortion - that you believe are morally unsound and should be viewed as crimes but which are currently not.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
I thought the civilized way to protect law-abiding citizens from criminals was to put them in prison? There is nothing whatsoever civilized about executing human beings, irrespective of how nasty there are.

And yes I would use lethal force if necessary to protect someone from being murdered. But that is a different conversation from executing someone who has alre ...[text shortened]... me any view opposed to the one you personally hold is, therefore, irrational, is itself irrational).

While I am sympathetic to the abolition of the death penalty, the Old Testament literally proscribes the death penalty for a whole lot of crimes, as atheists like you remind us frequently.

Surely if it can be argued that God is overly murderous in the OT, it can be understood by an atheist why a theist would support the death penalty.

@secondson said
Do you know what premeditated murder is?

Is it first or second degree?

Although I new you would dodge FMF’s question, I was hoping that you’d make a better effort than this.

@secondson said
If you're asking me if I support capital punishment the answer is yes.

Abortion is legalized murder.

So to your way of thinking, it is highly immoral to abort a foetus, but it is not highly immoral to execute a person for having an abortion...in fact it is justifiable?

@secondson said
Executing murderers is the civilized way to protect law abiding citizens from those that are void of conscience.

So Moses should have been executed by God for murdering that Egyptian soldier?

@secondson said
Counter quote: "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man."

Capital punishment is not "vengeance". It's justice.

So God should have executed David for the murder of Uriah?