• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

A Time To Wake Up?

Reverend Slip

New member
Joined
Sep 26, 2005
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Location
Cincinnati Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I keep noticing in debates recently the call for an eye for an eye, pre say if you were to kill, then in turn you should be killed yourself, or in a more realized example from a current argument, if you rape, you should be castrated .

How can this solve anything, killing isn’t right, no matter who is doing it, if I kill you, it certainly isn’t right, and if you kill me, that certainly isn’t right, so how in anyone’s mind can killing another person be right, even if they killed a person to begin with?
This thread is about the death penalty, and castration of sexual offenders, and questions how in good conscience can we punish these people the way we do.

For the crime of murder, we say kill the offender because it is only fair that if you take a life, your’s in turn should be taken, right? In philosophy that is a very intelligent idea, but in the matter of life and death, you can’t look at things just from an intellectual standpoint alone or we shall loose our humanity to cool logical thinking in which anything is possible, such as the fact that the extremely poor are not as productive to society as the middle class, so eliminating them would in that aspect be a good idea because not only does it frees up resources, but it also frees the middle and upper classes from financing them for their survival, but is that morally acceptable? No, of course not, purging this world based on financial status is clearly ridiculous, and why? Because of our humanity. So in essence the ideal of killing for killing is wrong too, because when we sentence a man to death, when we flip the switches that inject him, what are we becoming? We become murderers ourselves, by our dispense of “justice,” we become what we are so zealously trying to defend ourselves against. If we as a society say that killing is wrong and their should be an equal penalty for it, such as the offenders death, how are we any better than the offender himself?

Think about the implications of the death penalty, when we die, what will happen to us, will we go to heaven, hell, or will we cease to exist? All of these are possible, but we do not know, so we have an equal chance of merely ceasing to exist, so upon the death of the offender, let us say that he merely blanks out, and there is nothing more for him, what have we done? All we have done is end his life, and nothing more, for there is nothing left to him at all, but what we have done is forced his family to suffer, his friends to suffer, we are not in essence punishing him, but punishing a family that was in no way involved in this horrific act.

We have taken a father’s son/daughter away from him, we have taken a mother’s son/daughter away from her, we have taken a husband/wife’s husband/wife away from him/her, we have taken a child’s father/mother away from him/her.

They are the ones that truly suffer because of the death penalty, they bear the pain of losing a loved one, but then there is the question, the family of the murdered feels that pain too, why should the family of the murderer be any different? Because we are human, we do not want to inflict suffering upon the innocent, or are we nothing more but the monsters we try to rid ourselves of?

Rape, that is a hot topic right now, and there are debates about viable punishments raging over the real world and the internet. It seems that the consensus right now is castration of the man, or removal of the testes, due to the fact that it is argued that this act will lower the mans testosterone levels, and make him more docile, and therefore less likely to rape again. Unfortunately testosterone is not the issue in rape, rape was never, and never will be about sex, if a man wants sex, he can quite easily go out and get a prostitute, for there are many of them available in the world today, but rape is more about power. Power over a helpless person can be quite exhilarating to some, and why not, it’s human nature to want to be in control isn’t it? Now here is where rape gets tricky, if rape isn’t about sex, or a desire which we control, but is rather about power, which psychologists refer to as a power complex, which is a mental illness, yes, a mental illness, and we ourselves are do not control what illnesses we fall prey to, how can it be our fault if we were to have a power complex? Simply put, we can’t, and for this, something we cannot control, we are to be punished by human mutilation, or face imprisonment? Does that not seem wrong to you, especially when considering mental illnesses can be treated by medication and therapy? We are in essence mutilating a person with no control over himself.

Recently there was a man in prison who was put there for raping a child, and he told the authorities that he himself was sick, and he knew he would do it again, and asked them for help. What do you think it is that they did, refer him to a professional? No, they ignored him and released him back into society with no help or anything, and do you know what this man did? He raped a small; child yet again, this man asked for help with his problem but we refused to give it to him, and him not being able to control it himself did the act of molestation yet again. How is it that we can punish him when he knew something was wrong with him, and he even asked for help, and it was US who refused him!?

Morally, is it not wrong to pre say, remove a person finger? Then how could it be any better to remove a man’s testes? To me there is no difference no matter the crime, we are mutilating him, and I guarantee you, mutilating him will not solve his problems, only create a monster born from what we have done to him.

This here, I find amusing, there is such conviction from women for castration of a male rapist, but what of a female rapist? Why is there no fire and brimstone calling for her to be punished, for her to be removed of her ovaries, or her breasts, only a mans testes? Are women such holy creatures that they should be above all contempt? I say the are not, for in the Women’s rights movement, they called for equal rights, something they deserved, but why is it that they call for equal rights, but still wish to maintain the privileges that men do not partake? Is this really fair? It pains me to see the state of our country right now, where Political Correctness keeps us from saying what we believe, which is supposed to be protected by our constitution, the supreme law of our land.

I ask you this people, how can we call ourselves humans, when by what we do in the name of revenge, not justice, makes us the monsters we strive to rid ourselves of?
 

Naughty Nurse

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 5, 2005
Messages
1,972
Reaction score
12
Location
The UK
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Reverend Slip said:
I ask you this people, how can we call ourselves humans, when by what we do in the name of revenge, not justice, makes us the monsters we strive to rid ourselves of?
And there is the real point - it's about revenge rather than justice.

Nice post. Welcome. :2wave:
 

Reverend Slip

New member
Joined
Sep 26, 2005
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Location
Cincinnati Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Thanks, I wrote it a little while ago for class, but I've found it's really good for debating, so I figured I might as well post it to see what people thought.
 

mistermain

Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
199
Reaction score
0
Location
Las Vegas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I agree with the exception of pedophilia. I don't think they should be killed (I am Christian and do not believe in any kind of murder). I do believe they should be casterated, and put in general population with lifers. It is a little bit of justice for the child who had their life destroyed or ended. Call it revenge if you want, whatever. I have no sympathy whatsover for these people, and it makes me sick when anybody tries to defend their actions.

They can not be rehabilitated. I hate the idea of our taxpayer dollars paying for this trash. I really wish we could put all the pedophiles on a guarded island. They would be left to fend for themselves. Unfortunately the liberals in this country would never allow anything like that.
 
Last edited:

kal-el

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Messages
3,412
Reaction score
8
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Reverend Slip said:
I keep noticing in debates recently the call for an eye for an eye, pre say if you were to kill, then in turn you should be killed yourself, or in a more realized example from a current argument, if you rape, you should be castrated .

How can this solve anything, killing isn’t right, no matter who is doing it, if I kill you, it certainly isn’t right, and if you kill me, that certainly isn’t right, so how in anyone’s mind can killing another person be right, even if they killed a person to begin with?
This thread is about the death penalty, and castration of sexual offenders, and questions how in good conscience can we punish these people the way we do.

For the crime of murder, we say kill the offender because it is only fair that if you take a life, your’s in turn should be taken, right? In philosophy that is a very intelligent idea, but in the matter of life and death, you can’t look at things just from an intellectual standpoint alone or we shall loose our humanity to cool logical thinking in which anything is possible, such as the fact that the extremely poor are not as productive to society as the middle class, so eliminating them would in that aspect be a good idea because not only does it frees up resources, but it also frees the middle and upper classes from financing them for their survival, but is that morally acceptable? No, of course not, purging this world based on financial status is clearly ridiculous, and why? Because of our humanity. So in essence the ideal of killing for killing is wrong too, because when we sentence a man to death, when we flip the switches that inject him, what are we becoming? We become murderers ourselves, by our dispense of “justice,” we become what we are so zealously trying to defend ourselves against. If we as a society say that killing is wrong and their should be an equal penalty for it, such as the offenders death, how are we any better than the offender himself?

Think about the implications of the death penalty, when we die, what will happen to us, will we go to heaven, hell, or will we cease to exist? All of these are possible, but we do not know, so we have an equal chance of merely ceasing to exist, so upon the death of the offender, let us say that he merely blanks out, and there is nothing more for him, what have we done? All we have done is end his life, and nothing more, for there is nothing left to him at all, but what we have done is forced his family to suffer, his friends to suffer, we are not in essence punishing him, but punishing a family that was in no way involved in this horrific act.

We have taken a father’s son/daughter away from him, we have taken a mother’s son/daughter away from her, we have taken a husband/wife’s husband/wife away from him/her, we have taken a child’s father/mother away from him/her.

They are the ones that truly suffer because of the death penalty, they bear the pain of losing a loved one, but then there is the question, the family of the murdered feels that pain too, why should the family of the murderer be any different? Because we are human, we do not want to inflict suffering upon the innocent, or are we nothing more but the monsters we try to rid ourselves of?

Rape, that is a hot topic right now, and there are debates about viable punishments raging over the real world and the internet. It seems that the consensus right now is castration of the man, or removal of the testes, due to the fact that it is argued that this act will lower the mans testosterone levels, and make him more docile, and therefore less likely to rape again. Unfortunately testosterone is not the issue in rape, rape was never, and never will be about sex, if a man wants sex, he can quite easily go out and get a prostitute, for there are many of them available in the world today, but rape is more about power. Power over a helpless person can be quite exhilarating to some, and why not, it’s human nature to want to be in control isn’t it? Now here is where rape gets tricky, if rape isn’t about sex, or a desire which we control, but is rather about power, which psychologists refer to as a power complex, which is a mental illness, yes, a mental illness, and we ourselves are do not control what illnesses we fall prey to, how can it be our fault if we were to have a power complex? Simply put, we can’t, and for this, something we cannot control, we are to be punished by human mutilation, or face imprisonment? Does that not seem wrong to you, especially when considering mental illnesses can be treated by medication and therapy? We are in essence mutilating a person with no control over himself.

Recently there was a man in prison who was put there for raping a child, and he told the authorities that he himself was sick, and he knew he would do it again, and asked them for help. What do you think it is that they did, refer him to a professional? No, they ignored him and released him back into society with no help or anything, and do you know what this man did? He raped a small; child yet again, this man asked for help with his problem but we refused to give it to him, and him not being able to control it himself did the act of molestation yet again. How is it that we can punish him when he knew something was wrong with him, and he even asked for help, and it was US who refused him!?

Morally, is it not wrong to pre say, remove a person finger? Then how could it be any better to remove a man’s testes? To me there is no difference no matter the crime, we are mutilating him, and I guarantee you, mutilating him will not solve his problems, only create a monster born from what we have done to him.

This here, I find amusing, there is such conviction from women for castration of a male rapist, but what of a female rapist? Why is there no fire and brimstone calling for her to be punished, for her to be removed of her ovaries, or her breasts, only a mans testes? Are women such holy creatures that they should be above all contempt? I say the are not, for in the Women’s rights movement, they called for equal rights, something they deserved, but why is it that they call for equal rights, but still wish to maintain the privileges that men do not partake? Is this really fair? It pains me to see the state of our country right now, where Political Correctness keeps us from saying what we believe, which is supposed to be protected by our constitution, the supreme law of our land.

I ask you this people, how can we call ourselves humans, when by what we do in the name of revenge, not justice, makes us the monsters we strive to rid ourselves of?
Great post!:smile:
 

Reverend Slip

New member
Joined
Sep 26, 2005
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Location
Cincinnati Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I've actually mailed a copy of that through my school to my state's (Ohio) Governer (Taft), and planning on mailing it to our Congressmen.
 
9

943780

RE: Time to wake up
Rev. Slip

An eye for an eye is taught in the Holy Scriptures against
sin and wickedness. Do you disagree with the Holy Scriptures.

943780
 

kal-el

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Messages
3,412
Reaction score
8
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
943780 said:
RE: Time to wake up
Rev. Slip

An eye for an eye is taught in the Holy Scriptures against
sin and wickedness. Do you disagree with the Holy Scriptures.
Yes it is, but so is "Love your enemy" and "turn the other cheek".
 

V.I. Lenin

Active member
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
381
Reaction score
0
Location
NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
943780 said:
RE: Time to wake up
Rev. Slip

An eye for an eye is taught in the Holy Scriptures against
sin and wickedness. Do you disagree with the Holy Scriptures.

943780
I personally disagree with the Holy Scriptures ruling America. And I know many will agree.
 

Old and wise

Active member
Joined
Aug 28, 2005
Messages
310
Reaction score
0
Location
New England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
kal-el said:
Yes it is, but so is "Love your enemy" and "turn the other cheek".
There is always an answer, isn't there?

A whole book full of contradictions.
 

Binary_Digit

DP Veteran
Joined
May 21, 2005
Messages
4,145
Reaction score
1,638
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
That's a really good point about actually punishing the murderer's friends and family more than the murderer.
 
Top Bottom