- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Breaking: Barr directs fed government to reinstate death penalty, 5 ordered executed
Posted on 7/25/19 at 12:48 pm to RaginSaint43
Posted on 7/25/19 at 12:48 pm to RaginSaint43
quote:
1. People are bringing up their catholic faith as reasons to oppose it, I think this is fitting. 2. There is no Universal maxim that forbids me using a book (intended for the entire universe) in discourse 3. There are plenty of philosophical arguments I use often in the defense of the death penalty, but in quoting sacred scripture I chose the higher 4. Assuming religion is irrational is absurd. The greatest tradition of philosophers were religious whether they be pagan, Jewish, Muslim or Christian. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas were some of the smartest men to walk the face of the earth and only the most hubristic materialistic reductionists would deny their impact on modern thought 5. “Not everyone participated in religion, therefore my arguments cannot be universal” Well sir is that not like saying, “not everyone participates in the study of scientific truths, therefore I can’t speak them?”
Love the two downvotes by the way.
I directed my response to you, but it goes for anyone. My point is don't quote scripture in the Bible when debating. If you're debating someone of a different religion or a non-religious person, do you think it would carry any weight?
quote:
#11. People are bringing up their catholic faith as reasons to oppose it, I think this is fitting.
- see above
quote:
2. There is no Universal maxim that forbids me using a book (intended for the entire universe) in discourse
- it is not intended for the entire universe. The same way books from other religions may not fit your beliefs.
quote:
3. There are plenty of philosophical arguments I use often in the defense of the death penalty, but in quoting sacred scripture I chose the higher
- you can have 20 people discussing punishment and get 20 different answers. It doesn't have to be philosophical. I don't need a 16th century philosopher telling how I think about capital punishment. We all have brains. I choose to have my own beliefs, but that's just me.
quote:
4. Assuming religion is irrational is absurd. The greatest tradition of philosophers were religious whether they be pagan, Jewish, Muslim or Christian. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas were some of the smartest men to walk the face of the earth and only the most hubristic materialistic reductionists would deny their impact on modern thought
- never said it was irrational. Don't throw out scripture to people who don't share it. Of course people shouldn't kill each other. Most people know this. Don't need to quote the 10 commandments. That's just a morale issue, not religious in my eyes.
quote:
5. “Not everyone participated in religion, therefore my arguments cannot be universal” Well sir is that not like saying, “not everyone participates in the study of scientific truths, therefore I can’t speak them?”
- are you saying religion is as proven as science? Gonna disagree with you on this one too. And yes, not everyone participates in religion, plus there tons of religions out there. Most religions speak to universal moralities, but moralities aren't confined only to religion. But like I said, if you consider your audience, you should assume many are not of the same faith as you, and you should keep your faith out of arguments. The Bible says you should honor your father and mother. Well, so does everyone else. I'm not gonna consider honoring my father and mother because the Bible told me to, I'll do it because that is how I feel.
In addition, Islam is the largest religion in the world with the most followers. That would make Islam appear to be the best, most credible religion since they have more people who believe it, right?
Not sure if I'm making my point as well as I'd like to...
But you could ask successful people in debate. Religion is not a good debate tactic.
This post was edited on 7/25/19 at 12:51 pm
1
Posted on 7/25/19 at 12:48 pm to TigerBait1971
quote:says a lot about how twisted and demented you are; you prob think you sound cool but you really sound evil and immature.
I'm not a fan of the death penalty either.
I would prefer continuous torture.
Posted on 7/25/19 at 12:50 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
3 Clintons and 2 obamas
Posted on 7/25/19 at 12:51 pm to Bourre
HANG EM HIGH!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted on 7/25/19 at 12:53 pm to arcalades
quote:
says a lot about how twisted and demented you are; you prob think you sound cool but you really sound evil and immature.
Now you're talking deterrents.
Many people who break the law don't give a shite until they get caught. Then they change their attitude pretty quick.
Posted on 7/25/19 at 12:57 pm to TBoy
quote:someone doth protest too much
Because you are an idiot?
Posted on 7/25/19 at 1:12 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Imo, if you maliciously take a life, then you should forfeit your own.
If you rape and kill little kids...then you should be killed immediately, after it is proven.
The gov being involved is the only reason those 5 are still alive. Without government intervention, then I believe those pieces of shite would've been hunted down and killed, as soon as it was proven they were guilty.
Posted on 7/25/19 at 2:10 pm to arcalades
quote:
I'd rather see 25 guilty people not executed than one innocent be executed.
People say stuff like this a lot, but either they aren't telling the truth, or they are not quite right. The reality of that situation is having more depraved murderers among us than you can shake a stick at.
Maybe they just think all those killers walking around will never prey on one of their loved ones.
The truth is, no system of justice is perfect, and part of living in a society with the kind of freedoms we enjoy, is the possibility of being wrongfully accused of crimes.
We could eliminate a lot of that problem by only considering the DP in crimes where there is direct, unimpeachable evidence that the accused committed the crime.
Posted on 7/25/19 at 2:25 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Now I remember this. I recall hearing about problems with the cocktails for a lethal injection years ago.
They are not bringing back hangings in the gallows. Hell, they are barely for lethal injection.
They are not bringing back hangings in the gallows. Hell, they are barely for lethal injection.
Posted on 7/25/19 at 2:29 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Posted on 7/25/19 at 2:34 pm to i am dan
quote:
My point is don't quote scripture in the Bible when debating. If you're debating someone of a different religion or a non-religious person, do you think it would carry any weight?
The point of debating is to get at the truth not necessarily to win. I have no problem with a Muslim quoting the Koran. The issue is whether or not a statement is true or good not where it necessarily came from.
quote:
it is not intended for the entire universe. The same way books from other religions may not fit your beliefs.
As I said above, if something is true, it’s true and that’s the point. Whether it be from an astrophysicist or a homeless man, if it’s true it’s true.
quote:
- you can have 20 people discussing punishment and get 20 different answers. It doesn't have to be philosophical. I don't need a 16th century philosopher telling how I think about capital punishment. We all have brains. I choose to have my own beliefs, but that's just me.
This is an issue regarding ethics, which falls into philosophy. Philosophy isn’t just some elitist Gnosticism (unfortunately how it is in modern university systems), it’s plainly just trying to make sense of the world using our abilities to reason. It’s not a 16th century philosopher telling you how to think. It’s a 16th century philosopher making arguments and doing exactly what we are currently doing, trying to find the truth of it all. You don’t have to agree with him, but don’t throw out legitimate arguments because, “you have your own brain.” I don’t quote philosophers and scripture because I’m dumb, but because I find they say it better than I could and I find them to be true.
quote:
- never said it was irrational. Don't throw out scripture to people who don't share it. Of course people shouldn't kill each other. Most people know this. Don't need to quote the 10 commandments. That's just a morale issue, not religious in my eyes.
But you do infer this by saying it’s irrational to quote scripture. Religion speaks on morality just like you speak on morality. If I agreed with your assessment of something and quoted you, that’s not considered irrational. I understand if someone gets upset about someone quoting a vague scripture or literally just lists the Ten Commandments, but I didn’t give a short, vague verse. I have one that speaks directly to this issue at hand. I don’t see any problems in doing that whatsoever.
quote:
- are you saying religion is as proven as science? Gonna disagree with you on this one too. And yes, not everyone participates in religion, plus there tons of religions out there. Most religions speak to universal moralities, but moralities aren't confined only to religion. But like I said, if you consider your audience, you should assume many are not of the same faith as you, and you should keep your faith out of arguments. The Bible says you should honor your father and mother. Well, so does everyone else. I'm not gonna consider honoring my father and mother because the Bible told me to, I'll do it because that is how I feel. In addition, Islam is the largest religion in the world with the most followers. That would make Islam appear to be the best, most credible religion since they have more people who believe it, right? Not sure if I'm making my point as well as I'd like to... But you could ask successful people in debate. Religion is not a good debate tactic.
Religion deals with Faith, which is a super natural gift that isn’t accomplished on our own merits, and science has to deal with reason and things that are observable... or it should at least. But I will say science is not as proven as science thinks itself to be. That’s the problem with modern science, hubris. People believe anything that comes from the words of scientists and are more dogmatic than most religious types. I’m not accusing you of this, but my statement stands regarding that.
And yes religions not the only thing that speaks of morality and I do believe it is reasonable to live a moral life regardless of religion, the question that is often brought up however is duty, but that’s for another discussion. The point is that if both the philosophers and religions speak of morality, why is it inconceivable to quote one and not the other?
There are more Christians than Agnostics, deists and atheists, does that make Christianity true? That’s retarded.
And thanks for the tips on rhetoric, but I’m not asking for advice on how to win a debate.
Edit:not trying to be an a-hole with this last line lol
This post was edited on 7/25/19 at 3:17 pm
Posted on 7/25/19 at 2:45 pm to EKG
I am opposed to the death penalty as an institution. That said, I certainly won’t lose any sleep over these people.
Great documentary about Brian Stevenson I watched recently.
True Justice
Great documentary about Brian Stevenson I watched recently.
True Justice
Posted on 7/25/19 at 2:49 pm to threeputtforbogie
quote:
I've never understood the opposition to the death penalty for crimes this atrocious.
Because the same government that cant balance a checkbook and runs the our federal bureau of inefficiency is in charge of determining who gets to die.
Posted on 7/25/19 at 2:52 pm to troyt37
quote:
We could eliminate a lot of that problem by only considering the DP in crimes where there is direct, unimpeachable evidence that the accused committed the crime.
That should be easy. Lets make sure no one lies and everyone tells the truth.
Posted on 7/25/19 at 2:53 pm to hawkeye007
quote:
If you are for the death penalty and against abortion whats the difference in taking one life then saving another?
The innocence of the person whose head is on the chopping block.
Posted on 7/25/19 at 3:02 pm to EKG
quote:
don’t see it as a deterrent as much as a way to avoid paying to keep these animals alive for decades. That, and most of the victims’ families are able to find a modicum of comfort in it.
In cases as heinous as these, I don’t have the slightest answer as to what is/isn’t the right thing to do.
Well it deters these five individuals from doing any more crimes by 100% effective prevention. Also, even if it doesn't deter any others, how does it make sense to then keep them alive. Maybe we should let the families decide what to do with them...death, or torture, or both?
Posted on 7/25/19 at 3:07 pm to Pettifogger
quote:Ditto. There are some hills worth fighting on. These I would prefer to just lie down and look for shapes in the clouds.
Same
Although I won't be losing any sleep over these executions.
Posted on 7/25/19 at 3:18 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
OK, I will give libs this one.
People will die.
People will die.
Posted on 7/25/19 at 3:30 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
While I agree that some crimes are so heinous death is the only recourse, and I mean like immininent you’re found guilt a bullet is put in your head death not 30 years of appeals, but on a broad scale one innocent person being put to death wrongly outways the perhaps slight upgrade (debatable) of a life sentence over death for obvious offenders
Posted on 7/25/19 at 3:47 pm to flyAU
quote:
People will die.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
Page 8 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News