Are you a good person?

[Acutely decayed]

No?

[miguel1984]

A friend of my family was kidnapped and tortured for months during the last military dictatorship in Argentina. Afterwards, he said pain and suffering did not teach him anything at all; that suffering is just suffering, without any deeper meaning. He was so afraid the only thing he could thing about was the moments of respite after the torture sessions were over.

[Druidic]

Very true, Miguel.

We are creatures arising from the physical world with absolutes inside us. Absolutes like pain, hunger, even joy. We don't need external moral values; we have our own.

[Raul Urraca]

Nope, I'm a vain, cruel, inconstant, selfish, depraved, vicious, and all-around vile fellow.
I'm considering growing a mustache in the style of a cartoon villain.

Quote Originally Posted by miguel1984

A friend of my family was kidnapped and tortured for months during the last military dictatorship in Argentina. Afterwards, he said pain and suffering did not teach him anything at all; that suffering is just suffering, without any deeper meaning. He was so afraid the only thing he could thing about was the moments of respite after the torture sessions were over.

This is why I could not sympathize with Alex's fate in Stanley Kubrick's film adaptation of A Clockwork Orange. I remember agreeing with Roger Ebert's criticisms of that film.

I support the death penalty for people who gratify from being sadists, not out of a sense of vengeance, but simply due to the desire to preempt more suffering. I think the psyche of human beings can be seen as being largely a mix of chimpanzees (i.e., resolving conflicts through inter-tribal warfare) and bonobos (i.e., resolving conflicts through diplomacy or sometimes promiscuity/debauchery), given our common ancestor diverged a long time ago in the phylogeny. Some people tend to be more like violent chimps naturally (e.g., children who gratify from torturing helpless animals).

I think it's hilarious how a lot of supposedly compassionate people are against death penalty, even towards those we'd agree are "monsters", because they want to avoid "authoritarianism". You need some kind of social control mechanism from preventing natural psychopaths from exercising their urges, and at some point, you have to impose your will on others to prevent greater suffering.

Yeah, if only they had a secure place within which we could put such people indefinitely. Oh well, I suppose we better kill them instead.

[miguel1984]

I do not agree with the death penalty at all.

Gandalf said it best: “Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement.”

[Druidic]

Capital punishment debates generate more heat than light but here goes.

I find it hard to understand how one can be in favor of abortion and against the death penalty or or be pro-life and be for it;

There is one good argument for it: The most brutal killers will never kill again. Even in prison these guys are a danger to guards, other prisoners and citizens in general if they escape. And these things happen.

One good argument against it: Mistakes are sometimes made. Today executions are rare and when they do occur they drag out over years. That's a good thing. If a mistake is made there's a chance it can be partially corrected before it reaches a terrible conclusion.

A longer revised version of my poem, "The Rainy Season" sees print this month. In most of the poem I was interested in making the reader feel sympathy for a man facing the horror of execution. In the last two lines, however, the reader realizes if anyone deserves death it's this bastard.

Not a pro-death stance here, nor a stance against the death penalty. Let your conscience be your guide, as the Old Folks used to say.

There's no doubt in my mind that bin Laden was purposefully executed. The Seals were almost certainly given orders to that effect. Does that bother me? No. But because Obama gave the orders, there was no howling protest. He made the right decision: taking the man alive would have been a nightmare for more reasons than one. But it was an execution, as I see it.

Some favor abortion, euthanasia, but draw the line at executing stone killers.


It's a complex issue. But when you read about the tortures that killers like "the hillside stranglers" put their victims through--injecting antifreeze into the veins of the women they raped and tortured to see them convulse--you can't help but feel some monsters deserve to die.

I am talking about for extreme and established cases such as Ted Bundy, Ramirez, Albert Fish, etc.

I think a swift death sentence is best. I personally see no ethical predicament in executing such people who gratify from causing harm to others.

Keeping them in prison just leads to finite resources being consumed more for monsters, rather than allocating those resources for people who are capable of contributing to the community.

[Knygathin]

When I see myself for what I am and accept my place in existence, fulfill my given role, and diligently work at that, then I am good. When I deny myself, and dodge from my personal life duty, and succumb to self-destructive temptations, or laziness, then I am bad.

Being good, generally means listening to your consciousness (not the mad callings of the brain), and being generous to other life when you can (that doesn't mean giving to others all that their egos gape for, it can simply mean to give a moment of your attention to some entity deserving it), and always be generous in outlook to living itself. But also being able to forcibly defend yourself and your surroundings from a threat, without hesitation, when it is called for.

Being politically correct, does not make you a good person (it merely reveals you as being socially insecure, anxious not to loose your place in the temporary social context you happen to be part of).
Having politically incorrect opinions, does not make you an evil person (even if the social group pushes to make you appear so).
How can political correctness be "truth" or objectively "good", when it constantly changes over time? Better to be a rebel and follow the inner truth, without social anxiety, than follow what the majority are blindly led to choose. Since it will be something else in a decade or two, and people will look back with regret, it is not Truth anyway. It is only sheepish stupidity.