28 thoughts on “Crime, but what punishment?

  1. Does failure to immunize children count?

    How about promoting quack medicine?

    Drones? Bombing civilians?

  2. I was referring to that indirectly, but really I just started to think about the tactic used by Sal in the exchange keiths linked to.

    Would would not want those who slaughter innocents to be stopped and punished?

    No one that I know.

    And as petrushka pointed out, this banner can be flown over basically anything.

    It’s another attempt to “automatically” win any debate I think. The people that use this tactic know their arguments are unpersuasive, so it has to become good vs evil. Saviours of innocents vs those would would slaughter innocents.

  3. What punishment should be meted out to those who slaughter innocents?
    How is this different from “how should we punish murder?” except for the over-emotional language?

    Given the theory of “original sin”, wouldn’t Christians believe there is no such thing as an “innocent person”?

    sean s.

  4. What punishment should be meted out to those who slaughter innocents?

    For starters, something more substantial than what is meted out to those who beat puppies simply from enjoying the sense of power.

  5. For sending someone to their eternal destiny without Gods sanction of justice equals murder. All murders should be executed. They should lose their life as a punishment for taking a innocent persons life from them.
    to day a wicked denial of mans dignity and so right to his life is dominant. We don’t matter once more in the eyes of the rulers.
    This must be foght and destroyed.

  6. Robert,

    All murders should be executed. They should lose their life as a punishment for taking a innocent persons life from them.

    Should God be executed for doing exactly that?

  7. keiths: Should God be executed for doing exactly that?

    Can God kill without God’s sanction? It strikes me that the god of the flood was the first abortionist.

  8. stcordova: For starters, something more substantial than what is meted out to those who beat puppies simply from enjoying the sense of power.

    What, you mean like Darwin?

    Tell me Sal, were you a perfect child? If not, why?

  9. sean samis: How is this different from “how should we punish murder?” except for the over-emotional language?

    It’s different because on a thread talking about abortion Sal posted this:

    I would add that no longer will I treat someone who advocates the slaughter of innocents as merely misguided or mistaken. I will treat them as evil and name them as such.

    So he’s actually talking about abortion, not murder! And that’s my point.

    Call people doing a legal procedure evil and wait and see how the lunatic fringe reacts. Job done, and you did not have to get *your* hands dirty.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Tiller#Assassination_in_May_2009

  10. Robert Byers: All murders should be executed.

    And what punishment should be given to women who have abortions Robert? I understand that you would like see the doctors executed, but what of the women?

  11. stcordova,

    Sal

    Either stop with the quote-mining or give the full quote. There has been discussion that repeating quote-mines and long-refuted claims should be outside the rules.

  12. OMagain: Start another bible thread then.

    I guess I could start one, but I doubt people would be interested.

    And why on earth should I add yet another bible thread to the vast number that the atheists here have already started?

  13. OMagain: And what punishment should be given to women who have abortions Robert? I understand that you would like see the doctors executed, but what of the women?

    If the abortion is done in ignorance of killing a human being then there is no murder. Abortion is a special case where the victim is not seen as a human.
    uIf they did then all involved should be executed. its murder.
    few, or none, ever aborted thinking its a human being.
    Thats why they call IT a fetus and not a kid.
    words matter ion showing motives and understanding.

  14. Robert Byers: If the abortion is done in ignorance of killing a human being then there is no murder. Abortion is a special case where the victim is not seen as a human.
    uIf they did then all involved should be executed. its murder.
    few, or none, ever aborted thinking its a human being.
    Thats why they call ITa fetus and not a kid.
    words matter ion showing motives and understanding.

    So the Nazis who killed Jews thinking they were subhuman were not murderers?

  15. llanitedave: So the Nazis who killed Jews thinking they were subhuman were not murderers?

    They never thought they were not humans. Thats untrue. They probably didn’t think they were sub humans either. its a myth.
    Nevertheless motive is everything in murder.
    The pro-life cause will prevail with persuasion of the others to see the fetus as a child and not persuading people to not kill children.
    The abortion issue is a intellectual contention and not a moral one.

  16. llanitedave:

    So the Nazis who killed Jews thinking they were subhuman were not murderers?

    Byers:

    They never thought they were not humans. Thats untrue.

    Click here, Robert.

  17. Alan,

    I didn’t explicitly quote anyone, I merely said:

    For starters, something more substantial than what is meted out to those who beat puppies simply from enjoying the sense of power.

    I wasn’t explicitly quoting anyone. Quoting someone would be of the form:

    JoeEvolutionist said, “I beat a puppy”.

    but me saying

    it’s wrong to beat puppies simply from enjoying the sense of power.

    That’s not a quote, but only alludes to something someone said.

    I suppose to appease you, every time I hencefore use the word puppy at TSZ, I’ll try to give a quotation from Darwin’s own account of beating a puppy.

    So if I say, “puppies are so cute”. Just to avoid accusations of quote mining, I’ll provide Darwin’s own words about his crime.

    Once as a very little boy, whilst at day-school, or before that time, I acted cruelly, for I beat a puppy I believe, simply from enjoying the sense of power; but the beating could not have been severe, for the puppy did not howl, of which I feel sure as the spot was near the house. This act lay heavily on my conscience, as is shown by my remembering the exact spot where the crime was committed. It probably lay all the heavier from my love of dogs being then, and for a long time afterwards, a passion. Dogs seemed to know this, for I was an adept in robbing their love from their masters. (Darwin 1876:27)

    Sounds like Darwin is trying to clear a guilty conscience. Why say anything at all? He was a known liar as attested to by other people at the time.

    Lies-and the thrills derived from lies-were for him indistinguishable from the delights of natural history or the joy of finding a long-sought specimen.

    Sir Gavin De Beer

  18. keiths:
    llanitedave:

    Byers:

    Click here, Robert.

    U don’t need to click anywhere. its dumb to day they saw Jews etc as any different then they did 20 years before. any thing like that was just to whip up soldiers to not feel sympathy.
    Yet they knew they were killing humans and so perfectly murderers .
    The humanness of people nullifys anyones claim they are not killing a human. even sub human is still human.
    The point stands. if one believes one is killing people one is a murderer and if not believe then one is not. Just manslaughter etc

  19. Byers:

    U don’t need to click anywhere.

    Right. U need to keep ur mind tightly closed.

    its dumb to day they saw Jews etc as any different then they did 20 years before.

    You think German antisemitism was something the Nazis invented? Check out what Martin Luther wrote about Jews hundreds of years earlier.

    any thing like that was just to whip up soldiers to not feel sympathy.

    It’s called ‘dehumanization’. Hence llanitedave’s question:

    So the Nazis who killed Jews thinking they were subhuman were not murderers?

    Byers:

    even sub human is still human.

    Do you know what “sub-” means?

    The point stands. if one believes one is killing people one is a murderer and if not believe then one is not. Just manslaughter etc

    Okay, then by your silly criterion any Nazi killing thousands of Jews at Auschwitz wasn’t a murderer as long as he believed that Jews were subhuman.

  20. Slimy Sal:

    Sounds like Darwin is trying to clear a guilty conscience. Why say anything at all? He was a known liar as attested to by other people at the time.

    Lies-and the thrills derived from lies-were for him indistinguishable from the delights of natural history or the joy of finding a long-sought specimen.

    Sir Gavin De Beer

    Sal,

    Gavin de Beer didn’t write that, but of course you didn’t bother to check.

    The quote comes from Janet Browne, who was describing Darwin’s childhood:

    The inventions were , however, connected in important ways to the real world. He did not claim to see tigers in the Shropshire undergrowth, although Erasmus once taunted him with just such a suggestion. His youthful fictions mostly modified the run of ordinary events to make them more exciting. Exaggeration and intensification of experience were in this sense an imaginative rethinking of daily life, where unreal events were almost as real, and just as plausible, as he occurrences of bald reality. Lies — and the thrills derived from lies — were for him indistinguishable from the delights of natural history or the joy of finding a long-sought specimen.

    Charles Darwin Voyaging, p. 14

    Darwin grew out of it. What’s your excuse, Sal?

Leave a Reply