Would you support the death penality if YOU had to kill the condemned?

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"][QUOTE="zombiefruit"] No, it's logical. Try to find one thing that benefits society by keeping racists around. There is no positive to racism. If I could I would kill every racist on the planet. I would kill them with my hands, a knife, anything. I don't think with my heart, I think with my mind. zombiefruit

Both are unethical.IndigoSunrise

It's unethical to protect society from someone who has proven to have antisocial tendencies?

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"] See this is what bothers me. People act like a single action makes a person a monster devoid of thoughts, wishes, dreams, hopes desires, affections and loved ones. Your taking away their humanity when you do that. How are you better than them? Omni-Slash

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"]Both are unethical.GabuEx

It's unethical to protect society from someone who has proven to have antisocial tendencies?

No it doesn't. You don't know that. You say things like that without actually thinking about it. zombiefruit

Actually, yes, we do know that. People are not racist for no reason.

Yes. Its a necessariy evil perhaps but its not something thats exactly virtuous.IndigoSunrise

It seems to me that the real shame is the way in which the person turned out. Once a person is a menace to society, I see no lack of virtue in protecting others from that person.

[QUOTE="battlefront23"]Racism as a concept could never be eclipsed permanently, though I wish it could. It has to do with man's nature and his fear of the unknown...SolidSnake35

A persons ACTIONS affect others not their beliefs. Racists dehumanize minorities and your dehumanizing racists. IndigoSunrise

But its okay to take said person away from their family thus causing their family grief? IndigoSunrise

Now, the racism in someone's heart is a different story...battlefront23

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"]Yes. Its a necessariy evil perhaps but its not something thats exactly virtuous.GabuEx

It seems to me that the real shame is the way in which the person turned out. Once a person is a menace to society, I see no lack of virtue in protecting others from that person.

But how is it virtuous? Protecting other people may be virtuous but the way in which you did it violates the rights of the criminal. Its something that needs to be done but I don't see how its a good thing.IndigoSunrise

[QUOTE="battlefront23"]Now, the racism in someone's heart is a different story...SolidSnake35

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"] But how is it virtuous? Protecting other people may be virtuous but the way in which you did it violates the rights of the criminal. Its something that needs to be done but I don't see how its a good thing.Omni-Slash

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"]But its okay to take said person away from their family thus causing their family grief? Omni-Slash

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"]But its okay to take said person away from their family thus causing their family grief? Omni-Slash

I don't know, I haven't been in that situation :P but I would never ever kill a person, even though I agree 100% with death penalties.

depends on what they did....MgamerBD

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"] But how is it virtuous? Protecting other people may be virtuous but the way in which you did it violates the rights of the criminal. Its something that needs to be done but I don't see how its a good thing.Omni-Slash

[QUOTE="zombiefruit"][QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"] Racism is a belief. You'd kill people for their beliefs?IndigoSunrise

Its a job, in this economy i would take anything.

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"] But how is it virtuous? Protecting other people may be virtuous but the way in which you did it violates the rights of the criminal. Its something that needs to be done but I don't see how its a good thing.Omni-Slash

[QUOTE="zombiefruit"]No it doesn't. You don't know that. You say things like that without actually thinking about it. GabuEx

Actually, yes, we do know that. People are not racist for no reason.

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"][QUOTE="battlefront23"]Now, the racism in someone's heart is a different story...battlefront23

I don't think so. You say that a person is horrible in part because of the grief they caused people's families. But killing them also affects their family. How is that not wrong? Okay new question. Your own son killed 50+ people in a school shooting. You know that he is not an actual sociopath devoid of empathy and he will be safely isolated from the rest of the world for the rest of his life but will cost the state money. Thousands across the country call for his death and the general opinon of him is that he was a monster. But the only way for this to happen is for you to do it. A prison guard hands you a pistol. Would you do it? IndigoSunrise

Speaking of executions here is a video of one in North Korea. Its rather PG-13 despite the reality of the situation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAQE7kDwPZY

I'm not using this as an arguement but I just want people to know what takingsomeones life entails.

The criminal's right to life can be kept intact without violating a right of equal importance.SolidSnake35

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="zombiefruit"]No it doesn't. You don't know that. You say things like that without actually thinking about it. zombiefruit

Actually, yes, we do know that. People are not racist for no reason.

[QUOTE="battlefront23"]

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"] Depends what you consider racism. We'll never get rid of stereotypes that are thought to be racist because... well... they're generally true. SolidSnake35

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"] I don't think so. You say that a person is horrible in part because of the grief they caused people's families. But killing them also affects their family. How is that not wrong? Okay new question. Your own son killed 50+ people in a school shooting. You know that he is not an actual sociopath devoid of empathy and he will be safely isolated from the rest of the world for the rest of his life but will cost the state money. Thousands across the country call for his death and the general opinon of him is that he was a monster. But the only way for this to happen is for you to do it. A prison guard hands you a pistol. Would you do it? Omni-Slash

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"]The criminal's right to life can be kept intact without violating a right of equal importance.Omni-Slash

Okay I'll play even though you didn't answer me. Emotionally speaking I'd want to kill him. In my hour of distress I might even do it. Would that make it right in my opinion? No. I'd have affected his family the same way he affected me. How am I above him? However speaking from a calm and removed hypothetical standpoint I would not shoot him.IndigoSunrise

[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"]The criminal's right to life can be kept intact without violating a right of equal importance.Omni-Slash

[QUOTE="zombiefruit"][QUOTE="GabuEx"]

Actually, yes, we do know that. People are not racist for no reason.

SolidSnake35

No, you miss the point entirely. A feral child has been raised with little to no human contact, and because of that they act like severally mentally disabled people. And that relates to my "racism is not permanent" argument because if we raised children to be completely against racism, then they would be, but we'd have to do it early. The problem with our society is that the bulk of our personality is created during the years age 1-5, and we start school at 4, meaning the parents end up raising children in the wrong way.

How did you draw that conclusion based on rights? There's the right to justice but I don't think that trumps the right to life. You're proclaiming the seriousness of violating one person's right to life and then wanting to violate the exact same right without qualm.SolidSnake35

[QUOTE="IndigoSunrise"]Okay I'll play even though you didn't answer me. Emotionally speaking I'd want to kill him. In my hour of distress I might even do it. Would that make it right in my opinion? No. I'd have affected his family the same way he affected me. How am I above him? However speaking from a calm and removed hypothetical standpoint I would not shoot him.Omni-Slash

Depends on the crime, depends on if he was truly guilty (eye witnesses and everything), depends on the method of death. Murderers, depending on what kind of degree (if it's a senseless massacre or even premeditated), rapists...

If it was a he/she's in a room with a bag over his head, go nuts! thing, definitely not. I don't believe in suffering in any way, but I'm not opposed to rubbing someone out of existence if need be (in the most painless manner).

if we raised children to be completely against racism, then they would be, but we'd have to do it early. The problem with our society is that the bulk of our personality is created during the years age 1-5, and we start school at 4, meaning the parents end up raising children in the wrong way.zombiefruit

[QUOTE="zombiefruit"]if we raised children to be completely against racism, then they would be, but we'd have to do it early. The problem with our society is that the bulk of our personality is created during the years age 1-5, and we start school at 4, meaning the parents end up raising children in the wrong way.SolidSnake35

EDIT: Added 2 becauses, I'm tired.

I used to would have said yes instantly but these days I'm less supportive of the death penalty (in wealthy countries).mindstorm

A civic duty that I'm quite willing to perform if called upon

Yes, yes I would

But how is it virtuous? Protecting other people may be virtuous but the way in which you did it violates the rights of the criminal. Its something that needs to be done but I don't see how its a good thing.IndigoSunrise

If there are two possible mutually exclusive actions to take and you must do one or the other (in this case, either punishing the person or not punishing the person), then it seems to me that declaring neither of them to be virtuous means that you really need to rethink your definition of virtue.

Wait, so one movie proves your point?zombiefruit

There were, uh, facts provided in that movie, if you were paying attention; it wasn't just some pretty pictures. There is a strong correlation between being racist and living in racially homogeneous societies and having little education. If those who have interacted with people of other races tend to be much less racist than people who have never once interacted with anyone of another race, the conclusion we can draw seems rather clear.

Look up feral children. They have no racist tendencies, in fact, they don't even recognize humans. That is how strong culture is in affecting the way someone acts. zombiefruit

Feral children tend to be afraid of any human, for the exact same reason: fear of the unknown. You can't exactly be racist if you aren't familiar with any racial group.

[QUOTE="mindstorm"]I used to would have said yes instantly but these days I'm less supportive of the death penalty (in wealthy countries).IndigoSunrise

The likelihood of being asked to be an executor is low...seeing that I'm not a cop or anything.Death Penalties are required to maintain order and all,criminals won't hesitate if they won't get killed if they do a certain crime.So for those who did truly hideous crimes would deserve death.But I won't use hideous methods of killing either,if we torture the criminal before killing them,we'r as bad as the criminals themselves.It's best if we give them a swift and painless death.But that doesn't seem to exist...They either execute by hanging or a bunch of other torturous executions.

I don't support the dath penality to begin with. It's not effective.