mass murderer brutally executed in Iran

[The Last Conformist]

I'd like to see you announce that lofty morality to a mass killer who slaughtered your family.

...

If you'd read the thread, you'd noticed I've already dismissed that "argument" as stupid. What makes you think I'd be impressed this time?

 

[Mise]

I'd like to see you announce that lofty morality to a mass killer who slaughtered your family.

...

I'd like to see Kirsten Dunst naked in my bed.

Anyway, killing people is wrong. I don't see what good came from all those beatings. Yeah, it might have been jolly good fun for the guy who's kid got raped and murdered, but in the grand scheme of things, it's quite barbaric.

 

[CurtSibling]

If you'd read the thread, you'd noticed I've already dismissed that "argument" as stupid. What makes you think I'd be impressed this time?

I am blinded by your shining intellect....Not.

I care not what your reaction is.

Because you are entrenched in an unreal attitude anyway.

During the time this post was made, scores of people were executed worldwide,
do you think it really matters that you cry into your expresso over the humanity of it all?

A mad dog should be put down - The christian morality play is absurd.

.

 

[Stegyre]

Anyway, I disagree with killing people. I do not think that an-eye-for-an-eye is a good idea.

As a professor of mine in college (it may have been my father) pointed out to me, many, many years ago: "an-eye-for-an-eye" was actually a great idea, at least at the time, and in many respects still so, today. We too often look at this rule as a draconian requirement of punishment, when in actuality, it represents a limit upon a punishment. In the context of the Old Testament, where that rule is announced, consider that in one case an entire village was slaughtered because one of its inhabitants had raped a woman. See Genesis 34. Perhaps the rule might be better expressed: "An eye - and no more than an eye - for an eye." Indeed, the essence of most tort law rests upon this principle: pay for the harm you have done.

I also disagree with killing people. So often, however, that sentiment is expressed in defense of the murder, and the speaker turns a blind eye to the death of the victim. I, um, turn a blind eye to the regrettable-unfortunate-after-all-due-process-painless (at least in the U.S., where lethal injection is fast becoming the rule) death of the murderer.

 

[CurtSibling]

I'd like to see Kirsten Dunst naked in my bed.

Anyway, killing people is wrong. I don't see what good came from all those beatings. Yeah, it might have been jolly good fun for the guy who's kid got raped and murdered, but in the grand scheme of things, it's quite barbaric.

Says the person sitting on the sidelines.

You have no clue about having a familiy member raped and killed until you have been there.

It is so arrgoant for you people to sit here and proudly announce morality.

In fact, it is laughable.
Moderator Action: Trolling / flaming - warned.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
.

 

[Mise]

So, what, I should let people resort to their base emotions and animal savage revenge instincts and call it morality? Or should I use the benefit of an informed, objective position on the sidelines to see the bigger picture with crystal clarity? I find I think better when my mind isn't so clouded by emotions than I can't see right from wrong.

What's laughable is assuming someone who's kid has been raped is capable of fair judgment at all, much less the authority on morality you build him up to be.

 

[DexterJ]

What makes you think that the victims, or families of the victims, or friends of the victims, should deceide the punishment for crimes? I dont think that would lead to fair and objective punishment and/or rehabilitation of criminals.

Edit after reading Mises post I second his argument.

My attempt to get wasted did not go to plan which is why I'm back on the forum.

 

[CurtSibling]

So, what, I should let people resort to their base emotions and animal savage revenge instincts and call it morality? Or should I use the benefit of an informed, objective position on the sidelines to see the bigger picture with crystal clarity? I find I think better when my mind isn't so clouded by emotions than I can't see right from wrong.

Should we take your route, then?

To wring our hands, and fill our prisons with scum and then pay for over the
odds for it, so we can wallow in our own distorted view of christian morals?

Sorry, you are 100% away from convincing me.

Old chap,
When you start declaring 'right' and 'wrong', and then allow a hateful
killer/rapist to get a slap on the wrist, you are morally bankrupt anyway.

What's laughable is assuming someone who's kid has been raped is capable of fair judgment at all, much less the authority on morality you build him up to be.

I like how you twist my words.

But predictably, in your flailing rush to appease the liberal audience, you
have made one glaring error, I never fixed a moral obligation on any party.

I merely stated that a virus in our society should be permenantly eliminated.

We should exterminate, not be liberal flip-floppers and pay for a rapist's dinner.

The thought of my tax money going to feed a human filth makes me ill.

Face the facts:
Allowing an inhuman anomaly to live, based on some intangible outmoded moral hypocrisy is totally lamentable.

 

[Jawz II]

Says the person sitting on the sidelines.

You have no clue about having a familiy member raped and killed until you have been there.

It is so arrgoant for you people to sit here and proudly announce morality.

In fact, it is laughable.

.

when people involved are filled with emotions, only the ones standing at the sideline can really tell what the rational thing to do is

the people involved are too busy feeling, to be able to think (which is what animals do)

as i said earlier, i dont think theres anything wrong with revenge, as long as you are absolutly 100% sure you got the right guy

but death penalty shouldnt be given out left and right, it should be reserved for people like the guy this thread was originally about

i think if you just commit 1 murder, life sentence is punishment enough (you have to take into account, the guy that killed some other guy, was probably at the time filled with all kinds of emotions, like hatred, rage etc, the people handing out punishments arent)

 

[Stegyre]

You have no clue about having a familiy member raped and killed until you have been there.

If you do, you have my deepest sympathy. If you don't, then this is a little of pot-and-kettle.
It hasn't happened to me, either, and I deeply, deeply hope that it never does, or anything like it.
That being said, I cast my vote with TLC on this particular argument: it represents a terrible basis for deciding what is right or wrong. A mad dog - or a depraved murder - should indeed be put down, but not on the sole basis that the family members of the victim think it should be so. That is an argument that proves too much. (And yet at the same time it proves too little: does this mean a murder is "okay" if the victim had no family or loved ones?)

 

[CurtSibling]

If you do, you have my deepest sympathy. If you don't, then this is a little of pot-and-kettle.
It hasn't happened to me, either, and I deeply, deeply hope that it never does, or anything like it.
That being said, I cast my vote with TLC on this particular argument: it represents a terrible basis for deciding what is right or wrong. A mad dog - or a depraved murder - should indeed be put down, but not on the sole basis that the family members of the victim think it should be so. That is an argument that proves too much. (And yet at the same time it proves too little: does this mean a murder is "okay" if the victim had no family or loved ones?)

Again I repeat, that I never used the family members as a basis for my assessment.

That was a flawed idiom, thrust on us by other posters with an axe to grind.

My line is simple - A serial rapist that shows total contempt for humanity is good for extermination.

A person who kills his spouse in an argument (heated emotions) is a case of jail...

I hope this clarifies my stance.

.

 

[luiz]

I agree that justice should be served without passion nor prejudice.

But sorry, I can't really feel empathetic with the guy, and he fully deserved what he got.

Guess it's a case of "I know it's wrong, but I don't care".

Agreed.

Clearly there is something wrong with Iran's justice system, but this guy had it coming.

 

[Double Barrel]

One of the things I hold to be simply wrong is killing people.

Even in self-defense? Say your family is being threatened, would you kill someone to protect them? Or would your morality prevent you from taking action and you would simply stand idle while your family is slaughtered?

 

[CurtSibling]

I think he'll go for option two, DB!

 

[Mise]

I like how you twist my words.

Yeah, same to you...

Should we take your route, then?

To wring our hands, and fill our prisons with scum and then pay for over the
odds for it,

Says the person on the sidelines . Have you ever been to prison? Talk to me about how much it costs when you have an idea yourself.

so we can wallow in our own distorted view of christian morals?

I've never been to church in my life.

When you start declaring 'right' and 'wrong', and then allow a hateful
killer/rapist to get a slap on the wrist, you are morally bankrupt anyway.

Is being a hateful killer/rapist right or wrong?

But predictably, in your flailing rush to appease the liberal audience, you
have made one glaring error, I never fixed a moral obligation on any party.

So your willingness to kill him is not based on morality, but on a lust for revenge?

The thought of my tax money going to feed a human filth makes me ill.

The thought of his execution made me feel ill. Not as ill as his crimes did, FWIW.

Face the facts:
Allowing an inhuman anomaly to live, based on some intangible outmoded moral hypocrisy is totally lamentable.

I'm not sure which part of that sentence is more amusing. Probably the bit where you call it a fact. Yeah, that's it.

Again I repeat, that I never used the family members as a basis for my assessment.

So why bring it up?

Anyway, this is getting boring. You can have the last word if you want, I don't care.

 

[Double Barrel]

Two points that I fail to see convincing counter arguments in this thread:

I merely stated that a virus in our society should be permenantly eliminated.

It is a proven fact that 100% of executed criminals never commit another crime.

While I agree with Jawz II that CP should be reserved for those that are proven guilty without any doubt to prevent the execution of an innocent person, I have no qualms about eliminating those in our society who have proven to be incorrigible and continue to prey on innocent human beings.

 

[sysyphus]

Agreed.

Clearly there is something wrong with Iran's justice system, but this guy had it coming.

How do we know the guy had it coming? Iran is now dabbling in fair trials are they?

Don't bother with his confession, there's a long line of innocent confessors in that part of the world.

 

[Azadre]

One thing that I've never grasped: How is beating any less humane then lethal injection or dying by bullet? The end result is always the same...

 

[Stegyre]

I repeat, that I never used the family members as a basis for my assessment. That was a flawed idiom, thrust on us by other posters with an axe to grind..

In excuse of my asserted error, I can only offer:

I'd like to see you announce that lofty morality to a mass killer who slaughtered your family.
...

The distinction you are advancing between what undergirds your own position versus what is a valid argument for attacking someone else’s position escapes me.

On certain fundamentals, however, we agree:

When you start declaring 'right' and 'wrong', and then allow a hateful
killer/rapist to get a slap on the wrist, you are morally bankrupt anyway.

. . . as I log out to catch the bus home. (Excuse me while I step out on the discussion; depending upon how the kids and wife are doing, perhaps I'll pick it up at home.)

 

[Stegyre]

One thing that I've never grasped: How is beating any less humane then lethal injection or dying by bullet? The end result is always the same...

Oh, but how you get there . . . .