Started By
Message
re: The Death Penalty
Posted on 9/30/15 at 12:02 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
Posted on 9/30/15 at 12:02 am to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
I understand what you're saying, but you are wrong. The argument "the death penalty is defenses murder, therefore the death penalty is wrong," is, by definition, a circular argument.
Eye for an eye is a fallacy of relevance and really a moral proposition. I assume eye for an eye is just because it is not relevant, it is a moral proposition and what the American jury system is for.
Eye for an eye is a fallacy of relevance and really a moral proposition. I assume eye for an eye is just because it is not relevant, it is a moral proposition and what the American jury system is for.
1
Posted on 9/30/15 at 12:08 am to Warrior Poet
quote:
The argument "the death penalty is defenses murder, therefore the death penalty is wrong," is, by definition, a circular argument.
It's just not, man.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning
The premise is: I can't condone the killing of a defenseless person.
The reasoning is: The only reason to do so is for emotional satisfaction (in America's case, since we have the resources to house them).
Addendum: Emotional satisfaction is not sufficient to kill someone.
Not: Murder is wrong, so therefore killing them is wrong.
Post-Data: I already said what other arguments could convince me earlier, but you're just not paying attention.
This post was edited on 9/30/15 at 12:10 am
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News