From: hau4@ellis.uchicago.edu (sven  hauptfeld)
Subject: Re: morality????????
Reply-To: hau4@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 03:59:24 GMT

[Sorry, I didn't read this thread earlier, so I am commenting on more than one
person's opinions.]

In article <ednclark.721455345@kraken> ednclark@kraken.itc.gu.edu.au (Jeffrey Clark) writes:
>mccullou@cae.wisc.edu (Mark McCullough) writes:
>
>>In article <ednclark.721007809@kraken> ednclark@kraken.itc.gu.edu.au (Jeffrey Clark) writes:
>>>dpn2@po.CWRU.Edu (Damien P. Neil) writes:
>>>
>>>>In article <1d6e46INN7e6@shrike.und.ac.za> dace@shrike.und.ac.za (Roy Dace) writes:
>>>>>: In article <1d3nt2INN7m6@shrike.und.ac.za>, dace@shrike.und.ac.za (Roy Dace) writes:
>>>>>: > keith@cco.caltech.edu (Keith Allan Schneider) writes:
>>>>>: > : 
>>>>>: > : Capital punishment should be administered only if there is no doubt.
>>>>>: > 
>>>>>: > IMHO, there is NEVER `no doubt'.
>>>>>: 
>>>>>:    Suppose the police catch someone holding a knife, the sharp end
>>>>>: of which is planted in someone else, and the person does not claim
>>>>>: self-defense.  Is there any doubt there?

There is doubt that the police are lying. There would be no doubt only if the
judge and the jurors caught him and saw him with their own eyes - but that 
would violate the principle of separation of power, which is fundamental for
democracy.

>>>>>
>>>>>Well, I can't think of any, so I was wrong.

Wrong for not being able to think of the doubt, that is. I wouldn't want you
for a juror if I were on trial.

>>>>>                                           and I believe the same can be said
>>>>>of a society which chooses to kill its members.  We are not perfect moral
>>>>>judges.
>>>
>>>>Counterargument: a murderer is no longer a member of society -- he has 
>>>>renounced his membership by breaking the laws.

That is a very cruel society, by today's standard, that expells its members.
Anyway, haven't you ever broken any laws? I broke at least two yesterday: 
exceeding speed limit and using a state car to pick up a student at the 
airport (illegal where I temporarily am, as 'unfair competition' to cab 
drivers). Did I "renounce my membership" in the society?

>>>	Let's [...]                                    
>>>                                                       and just plonk any
>>>really nasty offenders on this island without any modern convenience and let
>>>them sort out their livelihoods amongst themselves. This would be a pretty
>>>good deterrent as who wants to go to a place where there is no bars or walls
>>>between you and that multi-murderer next door. I vote we just leave them
>>>there as they have forfeited their right to have anything that society can
>>>provide for them. No gaurds, no doctors, no tvs, no electricity, no guns,
>>>nothing, just a picket to make sure no-one gets in with a method to get
>>>out and who cares if they get overcrowded.

Isn't this, to a very good approximation, how Australia started? And, to a
somewhat worse approximation, America?

>>                                 Try looking at the drunk driving laws
>>in France or Sweden.  Now tell me that someone in that country will DWI
>>more than once.

If you think nobody will, you must be intoxicated.

	Sven

Newsgroups: alt.atheism