Try the political quiz
@9MFGY5DDisagreements7mos ago

First of all...

Flag on the play: statements irrelevant to the matter at hand

“"It is morally justifiable..." ”

We are not discussing morality. We are discussing laws and legality.

“"It is not morally justifiable to kill innocent babies in the womb."”

We are not debating pro-life vs pro-choice. We discussing whether or not the death penalty should be a part of our legal system.

The legality of the death penalty is a matter of law, and discussions on the matter should recognize what their qualities and function. Laws must be clear, and objective — morality is none of the above. Laws must be enforceable, and morality has more to do with beliefs, which themselves are not enforceable.

Law hands down punishment based on VERDICTS, not statements of the TRUTH. Ideally, the two align, but it's impossible to know with 100% certainty if something truly happened. Our legal system acknowledges this limitation, too — verdicts can state that someone is FOUND guilty, not that they ARE guilty.

THUSSS, in enabling the execution of those FOUND guilty, the death penalty would equally enable the execution of truly-guilty and truly-not-guilty individuals. It would also fail to enable the execution of truly guilty individuals so long as they are found not guilty.

If a punishment can be seen as deeply unacceptable/inappropriate when applied wrongfully, it shouldn't be a part of a "just" legal system.

No replies yet…

Be the first to reply to this disagreement.

About this author

Learn more about the author that submitted this disagreement.

@9MFGY5D

Last activeActivity11 discussionsInfluence1 engagementsEngagement bias100%Audience bias0%Active in
Disagreements  3 Counter Argument  2 Comments  1 Agreements  1
PartyUndeclaredLocationUnknown

More conversations

Join in on more popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…6mos6MO

The Great Progressive Exodus: Inside the Left's War Against Harris

One of the central mysteries of this election has been to what extent the left will defect from Democrats, potentially costing Harris the election with votes for JILL STEIN or CORNEL WEST. Stein is far from concerned about that, NYT’s Matt Flegenheimer captures in a lengthy and dishy profile. For the first time ever, Democrats are launching an ad campaign against a third-party candidate (Stein) over the coming weeks. And even Stein’s own family and friends tell the Times they don’t support her and urged her not to run. Stein, whose “bid can feel precision-engineered to damage Ms. Harris with key subgroups,” pooh-poohs what she calls the “spoiler mythology” and places the blame squarely on Democrats.On college campuses, there are some signs that the left-wing protest movement has quieted from its peak when Biden was in the race — but even a small number of defections from Dems could prove pivotal in a close election.In East Lansing, Zack Stanton reports for POLITICO Magazine that Michigan State student activists furious about the Israel-Hamas war are torn between demanding more from Harris and stopping Trump. In Chapel Hill, WSJ’s Jimmy Vielkind and Cam Pollack find that many pro-Palestinian protesters at the University of North Carolina are nonetheless weighing other issues in their vote, especially abortion rights. But liberal groups are warning that some undecided voters of color still don’t feel like they know enough to be convinced for Harris — and may leave the top of the ticket blank, AP’s Ayanna Alexander reports.

▲  412 replies