Ask a Muslim [split from introductions]
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 5 Votes - 4.2 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-07-2012, 12:11 PM
RE: Ask a Muslim [split from introductions]
(16-07-2012 11:01 AM)Humakt Wrote:  
(16-07-2012 08:48 AM)Chas Wrote:  D. None of the above.

I think that the morality and ethics and laws promulgated by the Bible and Koran are inconsistent and often abominable. Sharia law is disgusting. I don't believe in mutilation or death as useful or humane. However, I am not dead-set against the death penalty. I think there are some exceptional cases where it is justifiable, i.e. for truly heinous crimes where the weight of evidence is incontrovertible.

Note: Weeping was indicating over-wrought irony. Mods, where is that irony font or smiley?
OK, still some what contradictory, your dead set against, but feel it can justified. Think its inhumane, but happy to practice it. Believe in incontrovertible evidence.

To me it seems the morality, ethics and laws you advocade are inconsistent, abominable and frankly disgistusting and based in you blind faith in absolute proof.

In short I see no objective difference between what you decry and denounce and what you advocate, except in a matter of degree. If anything, at least the religious can justify there view in light of a higher power thus washing there hands misguidedly or otherwise morally speaking, where as you admit that such behaviour is inhumane, but nonetheless would feel justified in being the monster if you believed and you dont have the luxury of passing on the moral buck.

Weeping not irony, more weeping for humanity.

PS Its not just you, Ive had a pretty depessing few days, but what is point in all this talk about the march of rationality and how religion is wrong and secularism is the new golden dawn if nothing changes except the buzz words we use to justify the horrors we perpetrate.
Well that was a downer, Im gonna go shoot some orcs and loot there corpses.
I should have said "I think there are some exceptional cases where it may be justifiable". If push comes to shove, I would do away with the death penalty in preference to it being widely applied.

And I did not say "absolute proof"; I said "incontrovertible evidence". They are not the same.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
16-07-2012, 06:34 PM (This post was last modified: 16-07-2012 07:00 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Ask a Muslim [split from introductions]
(16-07-2012 08:48 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(16-07-2012 08:40 AM)Humakt Wrote:  Terse, fine I can handle terse.

But are you saying the death penalty is ok as well as retributive mutilation is also. But if it used for adultery its wrong.

Or you sayin the death penalty is always wrong?
D. None of the above.

I think that the morality and ethics and laws promulgated by the Bible and Koran are inconsistent and often abominable. Sharia law is disgusting. I don't believe in mutilation or death as useful or humane. However, I am not dead-set against the death penalty. I think there are some exceptional cases where it is justifiable, i.e. for truly heinous crimes where the weight of evidence is incontrovertible.

I think it needs to be earned. It's kinda like parole. You don't get to be executed until I'm convinced you fully appreciate the extent of the idiocy of your atrocities and then maybe I'll release you from your guilt for humanitarian reasons. Until then, I'm gonna remind you of it every day with graphic pictures and details of your crime Clockwork Orange style. ... Unless you're a psychopath incapable of feeling guilt. Then I'm gonna bombard you with pictures of puppies and kittens and babies you'll never get to kill for the rest of your natural life.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
17-07-2012, 06:35 AM
RE: Ask a Muslim [split from introductions]
(16-07-2012 12:11 PM)Chas Wrote:  And I did not say "absolute proof"; I said "incontrovertible evidence". They are not the same.
Theres a difference?

Legal Disclaimer: I am right, I reserve the right to be wrong without notice, opinions may change, your statutory rights are not affected, opinions expressed are not my own and are an approximation for the sake of communication.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-07-2012, 01:01 PM (This post was last modified: 17-07-2012 01:06 PM by Vosur.)
RE: Ask a Muslim [split from introductions]
(17-07-2012 06:35 AM)Humakt Wrote:  
(16-07-2012 12:11 PM)Chas Wrote:  And I did not say "absolute proof"; I said "incontrovertible evidence". They are not the same.
Theres a difference?
From my understanding, absolute proof doesn't exist because there is always the possibility of it turning out to be wrong, whereas incontrovertible evidence is, for example, an overwhelming amount of evidence that supports the claim that someone is a murderer, such as a combination of a videotape, a DNA test, a testimony, an eye-witness report, etc. I think he was talking about cases that have so much evidence to offer that you can't claim the person is not guilty (i.e. Anders Behring Breivik).

(Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, Chas Tongue)

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-07-2012, 01:04 PM
RE: Ask a Muslim [split from introductions]
(17-07-2012 01:01 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(17-07-2012 06:35 AM)Humakt Wrote:  Theres a difference?
From my understanding, absolute proof doesn't exist because there is always the possibility of it turning out to be wrong, whereas incontrovertible evidence is, for example, the evidence that supports the theory that our planet is over four billion years old. There are numerous methods to verify it and the results match each other which means that you can't deny that it's true.

(Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, Chas Tongue)
Is your example chosen for irony ? There's entire nations that deny that it's true Tongue
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-07-2012, 01:16 PM
RE: Ask a Muslim [split from introductions]
(17-07-2012 01:04 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(17-07-2012 01:01 PM)Vosur Wrote:  From my understanding, absolute proof doesn't exist because there is always the possibility of it turning out to be wrong, whereas incontrovertible evidence is, for example, the evidence that supports the theory that our planet is over four billion years old. There are numerous methods to verify it and the results match each other which means that you can't deny that it's true.

(Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, Chas Tongue)
Is your example chosen for irony ? There's entire nations that deny that it's true Tongue
Damn you people who quote me before I'm done editing! Hobo

Seriously though, I thought the same thing and changed the example to that of a murder case.

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Vosur's post
17-07-2012, 03:35 PM
RE: Ask a Muslim [split from introductions]
(17-07-2012 01:16 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(17-07-2012 01:04 PM)morondog Wrote:  Is your example chosen for irony ? There's entire nations that deny that it's true Tongue
Damn you people who quote me before I'm done editing! Hobo

Seriously though, I thought the same thing and changed the example to that of a murder case.
But the evidence for a 4.5 billion year old earth remains regardless of how many deny it.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
17-07-2012, 03:44 PM
RE: Ask a Muslim [split from introductions]
(17-07-2012 03:35 PM)Chas Wrote:  But the evidence for a 4.5 billion year old earth remains regardless of how many deny it.
Therein lies the irony. Weeping
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-07-2012, 04:08 AM
RE: Ask a Muslim [split from introductions]
(17-07-2012 03:44 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(17-07-2012 03:35 PM)Chas Wrote:  But the evidence for a 4.5 billion year old earth remains regardless of how many deny it.
Therein lies the irony. Weeping
But like the evidence in a murder trial is now abosultly or incontravertibly true?

I am aware if the distinction, but has no one ever been excuted that was later "proven" innocent, do miscarriage of justice not happen, are scientific theories not expanded upon.

The point in contention is that he would only support the death penalty in case of incontravertable proof, somantically this is an absolute, because it means beyond contradiction. However as Vosur has said the law, has a threshold of proof which falls far short of absolute, so in effect to say that you support the death penalty in case where in contravertabke proof exists is to say that you condone killing someone who is believed beyond a reasonable doubt to have done what is alledged of him.
The only time I think I could be comfortable with the death penalty, is in self defence at the point of action, that is to say if you are attacked and in defending yourself your assailent dies, then thats fair enough, nature red in tooth and claw and all that. But, as soon as that not the case and you have the opportunity to calmly sit and examine the events the death penalty is a cold blooded and monstrous act, even if everyone saw the act and he cofesses and is tried on the spot in the full light of day.

That being said, I'll restate, that the objection to the death penalty for adultery as being inhuman and flat out wrong, is just a matter of degrees with the death penalty for any offence I see no difference in actuality as to what the crime is, the end result is the taking of a human and that is the most monstrous act.

Legal Disclaimer: I am right, I reserve the right to be wrong without notice, opinions may change, your statutory rights are not affected, opinions expressed are not my own and are an approximation for the sake of communication.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-07-2012, 08:29 AM
RE: Ask a Muslim [split from introductions]
(18-07-2012 04:08 AM)Humakt Wrote:  
(17-07-2012 03:44 PM)morondog Wrote:  Therein lies the irony. Weeping
But like the evidence in a murder trial is now abosultly or incontravertibly true?

I am aware if the distinction, but has no one ever been excuted that was later "proven" innocent, do miscarriage of justice not happen, are scientific theories not expanded upon.

The point in contention is that he would only support the death penalty in case of incontravertable proof, somantically this is an absolute, because it means beyond contradiction. However as Vosur has said the law, has a threshold of proof which falls far short of absolute, so in effect to say that you support the death penalty in case where in contravertabke proof exists is to say that you condone killing someone who is believed beyond a reasonable doubt to have done what is alledged of him.
The only time I think I could be comfortable with the death penalty, is in self defence at the point of action, that is to say if you are attacked and in defending yourself your assailent dies, then thats fair enough, nature red in tooth and claw and all that. But, as soon as that not the case and you have the opportunity to calmly sit and examine the events the death penalty is a cold blooded and monstrous act, even if everyone saw the act and he cofesses and is tried on the spot in the full light of day.

That being said, I'll restate, that the objection to the death penalty for adultery as being inhuman and flat out wrong, is just a matter of degrees with the death penalty for any offence I see no difference in actuality as to what the crime is, the end result is the taking of a human and that is the most monstrous act.
You've made a very good argument. Consider

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: