Subject:
|
Re: From Harry Browne
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 27 Nov 2000 10:11:50 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
953 times
|
| |
|
|
Uh, society is not the victim here, dude. When talking about murder, the
victim normally is the person who was murdered, but maybe on your planet the
purpose of justice in a murder trial is to figure out how the unfortunate
slaying of an innocent person can best serve society. Sometimes you make so
little sense...
"Scott A" <eh105jb@mx1.pair.com> wrote in message
news:G440y9.FxG@lugnet.com...
> > Agreed. Absolutely. I personally value most adults more than any fetus. • On
> > the other hand, I'm not sure that we want our laws to set the severity of
> > penalty for murder based on the societal importance of the victim. In • that
> > case, killing a nine year old orphan would have less penalty than killing • your
> > dentist.
>
> Yes, I had thought of that when I drafted my last post. I suppose society
> has "invested" in your hypothetical 9 year old... but that is not a very
> strong argument.
So you knew you were wrong but you went ahead and said your crap. I don't
think society is a very strong argument here. Its just not a factor.
> I suppose my original argument reflects the current trend for the views of
> relatives/victims to be considered more in these matters.
More than the views of society??? NO! Why would anyone do something so
nuts??? The current trend???
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: From Harry Browne
|
| (...) Yes, I had thought of that when I drafted my last post. I suppose society has "invested" in your hypothetical 9 year old... but that is not a very strong argument. I suppose my original argument reflects the current trend for the views of (...) (24 years ago, 16-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
279 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
