Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine #votebluenomatterwhat are you having fun al? are you having van al? gaolang > your fav i refuse to pay my taxes imagine thinking trump is the good guy is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? it's over for trump life goal sister harem loli mfw kamala harris can actually win real madrid tax is the best thing ever happened to us trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you worst thread ever
The death penalty is an archaic punishment that has outlived its use.
While moral arguments can be made for the death penalty for certain crimes, the practically of implementing such a punishment and having it be fair just is too difficult.
life without parole serves the exact same function as the death penalty and I would even advocate for a sort of voluntary death penalty where people who have life sentences can choose to be euthanized than to suffer many cruel years in prison.
As for abortion. Abortion is fine because fetuses objectively are not people.
They are alive but they do not have any of the mental characteristics that one would associate with personhood.
I would argue a dog is more sentient than a fetus.
While moral arguments can be made for the death penalty for certain crimes, the practically of implementing such a punishment and having it be fair just is too difficult.
life without parole serves the exact same function as the death penalty and I would even advocate for a sort of voluntary death penalty where people who have life sentences can choose to be euthanized than to suffer many cruel years in prison.
Post automatically merged:
As for abortion. Abortion is fine because fetuses objectively are not people.
They are alive but they do not have any of the mental characteristics that one would associate with personhood.
I would argue a dog is more sentient than a fetus.
There is no such thing as "murdering kids" when you take away what is inthe womb until 13 to 15 weeks.
Unless you consider that plants needs to be all saved, there is no reason to be prolife up to a certain and large number of week. (consciousness only appear around the 20th week)
In fact, you are not prolife. If it was the case, you would be like me, a militant of people's identity, anticapitalist (as it creates homelessness and death), antiracist and feminist.
Yes, the reality is that you are not prolife, you don't really care about the life of a baby just as much as you don't care about the lifes of millions of people dead because of our society.
What you are is antifeminist. What you want is having a say about women's bodies.
And if that didn't convinced you, let's assume that a non existent consciousness has the right to life : Do you know the story about the violonist ?
Let me take you there by quoting Wiki:
""
In "A Defense of Abortion", Judith Jarvis Thomson grants for the sake of argument that the fetus has a right to life, but defends the permissibility of abortion by appealing to a thought experiment:
For the same reason, Thomson says, abortion does not violate the fetus's legitimate right to life, but merely deprives the fetus of something – the non-consensual use of the pregnant woman's body and life-supporting functions – to which it has no right. Thus, by choosing to terminate her pregnancy, Thomson concludes that a pregnant woman does not normally violate the fetus's right to life, but merely withdraws its use of her own body, which usually causes the fetus to die.
""
And about the death penalty:
It has no effect, its archaic and its, this time, a real murder.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/act500062008en.pdf
https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/news/s...e-the-death-penalty-is-an-effective-deterrent
https://dpic-cdn.org/production/legacy/DeterrenceStudy2009.pdf
Unless you consider that plants needs to be all saved, there is no reason to be prolife up to a certain and large number of week. (consciousness only appear around the 20th week)
In fact, you are not prolife. If it was the case, you would be like me, a militant of people's identity, anticapitalist (as it creates homelessness and death), antiracist and feminist.
Yes, the reality is that you are not prolife, you don't really care about the life of a baby just as much as you don't care about the lifes of millions of people dead because of our society.
What you are is antifeminist. What you want is having a say about women's bodies.
And if that didn't convinced you, let's assume that a non existent consciousness has the right to life : Do you know the story about the violonist ?
Let me take you there by quoting Wiki:
""
In "A Defense of Abortion", Judith Jarvis Thomson grants for the sake of argument that the fetus has a right to life, but defends the permissibility of abortion by appealing to a thought experiment:
You wake up in the morning and find yourself back to back in bed with an unconscious violinist. A famous unconscious violinist. He has been found to have a fatal kidney ailment, and the Society of Music Lovers has canvassed all the available medical records and found that you alone have the right blood type to help. They have therefore kidnapped you, and last night the violinist's circulatory system was plugged into yours, so that your kidneys can be used to extract poisons from his blood as well as your own. [If he is unplugged from you now, he will die; but] in nine months he will have recovered from his ailment, and can safely be unplugged from you.
Thomson argues that one can now permissibly unplug oneself from the violinist even though this will cause his death: this is due to limits on the right to life, which does not include the right to use another person's body, and so by unplugging the violinist, one does not violate his right to life but merely deprives him of something – the use of someone else's body – to which he has no right. "f you do allow him to go on using your kidneys, this is a kindness on your part, and not something he can claim from you as his due."For the same reason, Thomson says, abortion does not violate the fetus's legitimate right to life, but merely deprives the fetus of something – the non-consensual use of the pregnant woman's body and life-supporting functions – to which it has no right. Thus, by choosing to terminate her pregnancy, Thomson concludes that a pregnant woman does not normally violate the fetus's right to life, but merely withdraws its use of her own body, which usually causes the fetus to die.
""
And about the death penalty:
It has no effect, its archaic and its, this time, a real murder.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/act500062008en.pdf
https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/news/s...e-the-death-penalty-is-an-effective-deterrent
https://dpic-cdn.org/production/legacy/DeterrenceStudy2009.pdf