-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Euthanize rapists and pedophiles?
- Thread starter Spiderman
- Start date
Deathbydefault
Apistevist Asexual Atheist
In my initial response I replaced "euthanasia" with "grant death" in my head.
My response works better with your update
Too humane for such people, but I'll take it.
Assuming there is irrefutable evidence that 100% connects the criminal to the crime, that is.
I prefer innocents weren't killed at all, even if that means some of the guilty get off easy.
Fighting brutality with brutality is the way I would chose.
Last edited:
I voted no based on the conclusion that you intentionally used the term 'euthanasia' which is defined as a painless killing to end suffering based on the embolded statements above.
Those that commit such atrocities to bring suffering unto others forfeit their rights to escape their karma (vipaka) by such means as euthanasia. My opinion, of course.
I don't know about society. Its probably not worthwhile to be a rapist or a pedophile, but I don't think its safe to allow the govco to start executing people. Governments are almost always terrible at whatever they do. If you set up a system that works in government, it eventually starts to run down and to go a little crazy.
I like the idea of giving felons a partial vote, such as a fractional vote. We have too many people in prison, and I think that would not be the case if prisoners had a 1/5 vote. They would then 'Matter' a little to politicians, and its one more way to prevent the government from rounding up political dissidents as if they were criminals. As it is, once you're in prison its like you don't exist.
I like the idea of giving felons a partial vote, such as a fractional vote. We have too many people in prison, and I think that would not be the case if prisoners had a 1/5 vote. They would then 'Matter' a little to politicians, and its one more way to prevent the government from rounding up political dissidents as if they were criminals. As it is, once you're in prison its like you don't exist.
PureX
Veteran Member
When we decide we have the right to kill anyone who does something that we don't like, we will have lost any and all sense of righteousness. And where, then, does it end? Why only kill people for sexual assault? Why not kill people for committing any violent physical assault? Why not for any crime committed with a deadly weapon? Or maybe crimes against the ten commandments?
I would consider such things "extreme" circumstances.
Tmac
Active Member
Think about it, these people weren't born that way, they learned it, so lets take out the teachers as well. Do you think we'd have anybody left?
If they wanted to die, I suspect they could figure out a way to go about it themselves. I'm not comfortable making that decision for someone else.
Could you actually go about killing someone against their will?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Texas is far too eager to use the death penalty, the state serves as an excellent example of why the death penalty should be abolished.
Spiderman
Veteran Member
No I could not
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
But that is just because they go through all of that "due process nonsense". Think of how much easier it would be if they kept a horse and a noose at the jail. Surly people would never react emotionally and convict the first available loser.
I'm OK with government being slow & inefficient at executing people.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
No doubt. I hope you do realize that my tongue was very much in cheek in that post. There is no going back from an erroneous execution.
I suspected such.
Out of a sense of compassion not to extract revenge or send a message. It's not like all the cats and dogs of the world go
"Well they just killed spot, won't be a dog in that state. Too dangerous."
Euthanasia implies ending of suffering. Killing does not. Besides I'm sure many animals who suffer horrible diseases would welcome death if we could talk to them.
LionLooking
Member
That's where you and I differ. Extreme circumstances, to me, would be to save lives. No lives are saved by killing someone who is in prison.
Frater Sisyphus
Contradiction, irrationality and disorder
The death penalty is (legally justified, where it's legal) murder, as far as I'm concerned. Except, often it's not a single person flicking the switch; it's the legal system itself.