Is forced labour in prisons ethical? My intuitive hunch is probably not, so why do we allow it exactly?
-
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!
Is forced labour in prisons ethical?
- Thread starter danieldemol
- Start date
I would say no, although the 13th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution allows for it:
Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Forced labor is no more unethical than is forced confinement assuming, of course, humane working conditions.
That seems odd to me because I believe forced confinement is a practical necessity in certain instances for the saftey of society, whereas I don't see forced labour as being a practical necessity unless it were to somehow become necessary to confine a large percentage of the workforce which I am doubtful of.
Doesn't society force labor for food, clothing, and shelter? Why would prison be any different?
Because it is involuntary shelter, a person can choose not to eat or wear clothes and choose to be homeless in my view.
Additionaly because I'm doubtful that union representatives are allowed to contribute to working conditions and wages in prison, although it maybe that they are and I'm just unaware of it.
I don't see the issue being one of necessity. At best, the incarcerated should be humanely housed, fed, and, where possible, rehabilitated. That is costly, and I see no reason why the prisoner should not work to help offset that cost.
The permissible conditions of such work is, of course, a separate question.
I'll stop you right there.
Unless the individual in prison was ignorant of the potential consequences of their actions, there is nothing "involuntary" about being sheltered there.
And a person would die. They can do the same whether free or incarcerated.
So ignore the issues of jail for a brief moment, do you think that people who are mentally and/or physically unfit for work should be forced to work for food, shelter and clothing?
Now coming back to the issue of jail, aren't a high proportion of inmates mentally unwell?
In Australia, 'Of prison entrants surveyed in 2018:
- 2 in 5 (40%) reported having been told they had a mental health disorder at some point during their lives
- females (28%) were almost twice as likely as males (15%) to be dispensed mental health-related medication
- almost 1 in 5 (18%) were referred to mental health services for observation and further assessment (AIHW 2019).'
Source: Health of people in prison
See my statistics on mental health of the Australian prison population in post #10 please
They would die incarcerated (in shelter), not die free in the open air in my view.
You've just moved the goalposts.
To my knowledge, there are systems in place to determine if one is mentally fit to be tried or imprisoned, at least here in the States, just as there are systems in place to determine if one is mentally fit to work in society.
Also I wonder why you see it as a seperate question, in my view it is not as if one can strike to improve conditions when they are forced to work can they?
Should people unfit for work be forced to work? No. Neither should people who are lactose intolerant be force-fed butter milk.
Now, could we get back to the question posed in the OP?
It is a separate question because it is a separate question.
Are there systems in place to determine if one is fit to work in prison or are they just forced to labour?
So people in jail should be assessed for mental and or physical fitness to work as well? Well at least that is something I suppose. Now how does one strike to improve conditions/wages in a system where they are forced to work?
wellwisher
Well-Known Member
A better way to frame this is to give the criminal a choice of suffering the fate of their victim(s) or forced labor. If they choose force labor, then it is their choice and not exactly forced labor in the sense of no choice.
The Liberal mind empathizes with the criminals, more than their victims. Nobody is looking at the bigger picture of why the criminal is there, who were their victims and why did it even come to forced labor? You guys come in too late to be objective. Your leaders have taught you to empathize with the criminals, so you do not turn on them, when they create victims; Trump. You are taught the victim deserves it, while the poor misunderstood criminals need to be pampered.
There are victimless crimes; taboos and prohibitions. If there are no victims, the criminals can also choose to suffer the fate of no tangible victims or hard labor. He can choose to be released, so he is not a victim, or hard labor (on a fitness diet).
The business charge against Trump, in NYC, about inflating the value of property, for bank loans, has no victims. In this just strategy, Trump could choose to be a no victim; nothing happens or hard labor. The criminals in then court system, who made him a victim, may have to make a choice to suffer the same fate of their victim; bled of their money in long winded court battles, or hard labor.
Wikipedia: Prison strikes.
Now, if we can please be done with this dance, I would appreciate a YES or NO answer to the following question:
- assuming that some system of incarceration should be maintained, and
- assuming that the society involved insures humane conditions of incarceration, and
- acknowledging that systems of incarceration impose a cost to that society,
- is it reasonable that those incarceration participate, in accordance with their ability, in offsetting that cost?
Horse-manure in my view. I decided not to comment on the rest of your (what I view as) partisan drivel