[QUOTE=eleanorigby]
Oh, brother. :rolleyes: I am not worried about my “ethical” lines. I am conveying feelings of strong anger, disgust, horror, dismay despair and other negative emotions–I ran out of words and my thesaurus isn’t handy. How is sterilization unfair? Never mind–I really don’t want to know your answer.
You don’t need to save me from myself, really–it’s ok to express thoughts and feelings about this appalling situation in strong terms. They don’t have to hold any ethical (or even logical) line–they’re* feelings*.
Feelings are the heart of the matter—but not negative ones. In my humble opinion, you’re letting compassion cloud your judgment, as badly as rage.
What good would prison do? It reinforces the concept that in a society of laws, actions—even atrocious ones—have consequences. That there are certain basic standards of civilization that each person must live up to. Your feelings seem to be that commiting an atrocious act is grounds enough for insanity—because only an insane person could commit an atrocious act. Such reasoning leads to a situation where only thing you have to do to escape penalty for a crime is to commit it.
There is as much reason to assuming that he’s as “crazy” as she is, or that she’s as sane as he is. But we’re back to feelings again—and you say you’re not “out for blood,” and that it would be unfair to punish someone too insane to be held responsible for their actions—there’d be no logic to acting on feelings of anger, and disgust. But at the same time you seem to use those same feelings to justify taking action against people who, by your own logic, are effectively guiltless. Merely sick people who, if treated, are now normal again. “How does it help to sterilize normal people? What purpose does it serve?”
If feelings alone are enough to remove a person from the gene pool, they’re surely also enough to clap them in irons.
[QUOTE=eleanorigby]
Oh, brother. :rolleyes: I am not worried about my “ethical” lines. I am conveying feelings of strong anger, disgust, horror, dismay despair and other negative emotions–I ran out of words and my thesaurus isn’t handy. How is sterilization unfair? Never mind–I really don’t want to know your answer.
You don’t need to save me from myself, really–it’s ok to express thoughts and feelings about this appalling situation in strong terms. They don’t have to hold any ethical (or even logical) line–they’re* feelings*.
Feelings are the heart of the matter—but not negative ones. In my humble opinion, you’re letting compassion cloud your judgment, as badly as rage.
What good would prison do? It reinforces the concept that in a society of laws, actions—even atrocious ones—have consequences. That there are certain basic standards of civilization that each person must live up to. Your feelings seem to be that commiting an atrocious act is grounds enough for insanity—because only an insane person could commit an atrocious act. Such reasoning leads to a situation where only thing you have to do to escape penalty for a crime is to commit it.
There is as much reason to assuming that he’s as “crazy” as she is, or that she’s as sane as he is. But we’re back to feelings again—and you say you’re not “out for blood,” and that it would be unfair to punish someone too insane to be held responsible for their actions—there’d be no logic to acting on feelings of anger, and disgust. But at the same time you seem to use those same feelings to justify taking action against people who, by your own logic, are effectively guiltless. Merely sick people who, if treated, are now normal again. “How does it help to sterilize normal people? What purpose does it serve?”
.
If feelings alone are enough to remove a person from the gene pool, they’re surely also enough to clap them in irons.
Feelings are the heart of the matter—but not negative ones. In my humble opinion, you’re letting compassion cloud your judgment, as much as rage.
What good would prison do? It reinforces the concept that in a society of laws, actions—even atrocious ones—have consequences. That there are certain basic standards of civilization that each person must live up to. Your feelings seem to be that commiting an atrocious act is grounds enough for insanity—because only an insane person could commit an atrocious act. Such reasoning leads to a situation where only thing you have to do to escape penalty for a crime is to commit it.
There is as much reason to assuming that he’s as “crazy” as she is, or that she’s as sane as he is. But we’re back to feelings again—and you say you’re not “out for blood,” and that it would be unfair to punish someone too insane to be held responsible for their actions—there’d be no logic to acting on feelings of anger, and disgust. But at the same time you seem to use those same feelings to justify taking action against people who, by your own logic, are effectively guiltless. Merely sick people who, if treated, are now normal again. “How does it help to sterilize normal people? What purpose does it serve?”
If feelings alone are enough to remove a person from the gene pool, they’re surely also enough to clap them in irons.
all I can do is thank you for pointing out my logical inconsistencies and avoid you by going back for more chips and dip. I think you’re full of it, but I’m going to go now.
