Saudi court orders man to be forcibly paralyzed as punishment

[zwhit]

I'm voting for redneck payback.

I'm in

 

[cindylou]

He was 14 when it happened.

 

[zwhit]

are you telling me I should read the articles before posting?

 

[billfred]

awful really

 

[kx250rider]

I'm voting for redneck payback.

...The Texan way!

:

Charles

 

[wootoom]

are you telling me I should read the articles before posting?

Hahahahahahahaha

 

[zwhit]

After reading the whole article and not just the part HH posted, it sounds pretty sick at first thought. Everyone feels sorry for the guy, he was just a kid, etc etc. But what about the victim? Do his feelings on the matter count?

There's probably too much being left out of the article for me to form a real opinion.

 

[homingpigeon]

Which is worse?

1) Someone being punished for a crime they didn't commit?

2) Someone not being punished for a crime they did commit?

If you can answer the above . . . then you have the answer to "eye for an eye". Societies that adhere to stricter punishments for violent crimes have clearly decided that #2 is the worse outcome. Conversely, societies that believe #1 is the worse outcome have adopted less harsh (revocable) punishments for violent offenders.



This critical thinking can be used to analyse many choices society makes in dealing with broad situations. Here is another example:

Which is the greater wrong?

1) Someone who has the right to vote not being allowed to vote?

2) Someone who doesn't have the right to vote being allowed to vote?

If you can answer this question then you can answer the question of whether you agree or disagree with new legislation that would require a citizen to show official ID to vote.

 

[zwhit]

Which is worse?

1) Someone being punished for a crime they didn't commit?

2) Someone not being punished for a crime they did commit?

If you can answer the above . . . then you have the answer to "eye for an eye". Societies that adhere to stricter punishments for violent crimes have clearly decided that #2 is the worse outcome. Conversely, societies that believe #1 is the worse outcome have adopted less harsh (revocable) punishments for violent offenders.



This critical thinking can be used to analyse many choices society makes in dealing with broad situations. Here is another example:

Which is the greater wrong?

1) Someone who has the right to vote not being allowed to vote?

2) Someone who doesn't have the right to vote being allowed to vote?

If you can answer this question then you can answer the question of whether you agree or disagree with new legislation that would require a citizen to show official ID to vote.

good post. puts it into perspective

where did you copy and paste it from?

 

[billfred]

After reading the whole article and not just the part HH posted, it sounds pretty sick at first thought. Everyone feels sorry for the guy, he was just a kid, etc etc. But what about the victim? Do his feelings on the matter count?

There's probably too much being left out of the article for me to form a real opinion.

If you there is any thought in your brain that paralyzing someone is a proper punishment, you have some growing up to do.

That is a terrible thought. Stone age type of shit. There is a reason we have cruel and unusual punishment laws in our constitution.