Depriving a person of his will to live is the same, if not worse than killing that person. If murder is illegal under all circumstances, then torture should be illegal. Torture is unimaginable and permanent scaring of the body and soul (Dieringer). Torture is inhumane because it severely injures human bodies to a degree that can never be fixed. Torture has tremendous negative physical effects on the human body.
Relativism Relativism The article of “Some Moral Minima” written by Lenn Goodman, discusses issues in our society he believes to be truly unethical and wrong. Some cultures believe the things mentioned by Goodman to be ethical and acceptable in their culture because it is they way they way have been doing things for many years. Some points discussed by Goodman are genocide, terrorism, and rape. The first example from Goodman is genocide, the murdering or extermination of an entire race or culture. Mass murder is compared to genocide and an example would be when nations or groups are at war with each other.
To kill people who have killed someone close to simply to continue the cycle of violence, it destroys the avenger as well as the defender. 5. The justice system is so poor rendering the death penalty even to those innocent people; it
In the reading, “Brock grants that voluntary euthanasia, whether active or passive, is the deliberate killing of an innocent person” (164). In a sense, he states this may not always be wrong and also explains that when actively killing someone who wants to die really is not different from just allowing a patient to die, on a moral basis. He argues, on the premises of permitting euthanasia, that the potential good consequences outweigh the potential bad
Based on the Best Bet theory we can assume that the risk of losing one’s own life and any potential to ever see freedom again is just as good of a punishment as any other. If not using capital punishment reduces how many are deterred and does not reduce the number of innocent lives taken we too are responsible for the loss of those lives. We are responsible not only for our own direct actions but also for our inaction and the consequences of it. Objections to the death Penalty: Objection 1: “Capital punishment is a morally unacceptable thirst for revenge.” Revenge is a personal response, done out of anger and hatred, which inflicts harm to the perpetrator. Retributivism is an unbiased and impartial response to a perpetrator that has wronged another.
Rape is a decision. It makes People feel strong and powerful over the victim. (“Rape Cannot”). All men are potential rapists is true but women can rape also so how is it that men are biologically designed to rape. What makes men rape is not some sexual urge that is just part
Sykes argues how the loss of freedom, heterosexual relationships, isolation and boredom leads inmates needing to engage in violence which is a reaction to the hurt they feel. Deindividuation may also account for a display of aggression. Removing an individual’s own clothes and replacing them with uniform plays a major part in depersonalising them. The removal of this individuality is more likely to dehumanise them. An example is in the Rwandan Genocide in which 800,000 Tutis were killed by Rwandan extremists.
There is a moral difference between Shelton’s killing of his attackers and that of his other victims. Darby and Ames caused personal harm to Shelton and thus gave him the moral right to try and prevent any other future pain that could be caused by these men, but the other victims were combatants in the war that Shelton waged against the “system”. When looking at Darby and Ames, Shelton takes a more utilitarian approach when dealing with their killings. The government “system” is supposed to punish those who are wrong. But in the trial of Darby and Ames, only Ames was punished severely while Darby was allowed to go free.
This man caused a family to be broken, a man to be scarred forever, and disturbed the minds of thousands of people across the nation. I guess it goes without saying that he deserved far more than life in prison with a chance of parole. This criminal deserved the DEATH penalty. You should definitely consider this a case of injustice. Lastly, the Charles Manmosn case was a situation of injustice because it make other criminals think that they can get away with doing wrong things without getting proper punishment.
Since the United States does not have an official religious code to interpret right from wrong, we have to depend on our criminal laws. If the laws are not strict enough, as the Death Penalty is, it is too enticing for our criminals. Therefore making it easier for criminals to kill. Harsh, severe laws provide an important measure of society's values and morals. How can the government be "soft on crime"" How can they let others kill innocent people?