The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Philosophical arguments about religion at Christmas > Comments

Philosophical arguments about religion at Christmas : Comments

By Tristan Ewins, published 22/12/2017

In the light of the Royal Commission into Child Sexual Abuse some people are claiming a general redundancy of Christianity, or even religion in general.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 26
  7. 27
  8. 28
  9. Page 29
  10. 30
  11. 31
  12. 32
  13. All
Attack” is an emotive way of putting it, ALTRAV.

<<… you attack anothers opinions or comments and replace them with questions.>>

I will discredit a claim that I know it is wrong, and request evidence when I know there is none.

<<Stop spouting your imaginary wisdom.>>

At no point have I suggested that I am wise.

<<If I say people are stupid and not interested in their own welfare I have good reason to say such things.>>

So, that’s all you were saying? If you’re so passionate about the topics on which you comment, then why not educate yourselves on them. I mean, you criticise juries, yet don’t even know why they exist!

<<I am not concerned with your explanation of juries ...>>

And yet you criticize them anyway.

<<The system and the people entrusted to manage this country and all it's various services are too lax to be trusted to do the right thing.>>

That’s a bit of a broad statement. This is not my experience, where the criminal justice system is concerned, at least.

<<Of course innocent people have been wrongly incarcerated both in the past and in the future.>>

More to the point: executed.

You might acknowledge this, but I’m more interested in why you think that’s acceptable in societies that have the resources for other options.

<<As I keep trying to explain to you, every time you question a comment there is evidence [for] opposing views ...>>

But is it reliable, and why won't you present it?

<<I have at times researched your comments or rebuts, only to find conflicting views and opinions from various authors.>>

Do you have an example?

<<So you can tell who is innocent and who is guilty.>>

The courts can the vast majority of the time, yes. Even if they have to correct themselves at a later date in rare cases.

Continued…
Posted by AJ Philips, Wednesday, 10 January 2018 11:10:00 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
...Continued

<<You see your argument is flawed because the system everyone puts so much faith in fails all the time.>>

No, it only fails some of the time. I have never claimed otherwise.

<<... no one wants to execute an innocent man.>>

Of course not. I have never suggested that anyone did.

<<Not withstanding your dislike for the death penalty, you will find a lot more people than you think are for it.>>

I’m well aware of the statistics there, even the fact some change their mind during a survey when asked what method they think should be used.. This is a fallacious appeal to numbers, too, by the way:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

<<Research shows there is no conclusive evidence one way or another …>>

Perhaps. But it IS heavily weighted against the death penalty:

http://deathpenaltyinfo.org
Posted by AJ Philips, Wednesday, 10 January 2018 11:11:14 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ashbo, I'm not sure about your response to me about 'feel'. I think you may have confused me with another commentor.

But as I am here, I will say that people rely a lot on how they 'feel'. I'm not sure how it is a bad thing as this 'feeling' they have must have manifested itself from experiences or personal exposure to some pretty unsavoury things in their lives.

So it leaves them with a bad feeling, which is OK because it is a word that is used to summerise.
Posted by ALTRAV, Wednesday, 10 January 2018 3:59:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
To Ashbo. If a criminal did something worthy of the death penalty, then the penalty is justified. The only concern to not kill of murders and other heinous crimes, is the possibility to harm an innocent person because the system doesn't always get it right.

It's not that it's not justified. At least not with regard to the crimes the death penalty would be applied to. As a punishment for the criminal that do the heinous crimes,mas well as a deterrent from others following suit, the death penalty is a deterrent against injustice.

If you can deter injustice without invoking the death penalty, so be it. That's great and it will save those who get wrongfully accused. If not, so be it. In our systems of justice, even though it is flawed, the death penalty is justified for those who commit crimes that warrant the penalty.
Posted by Not_Now.Soon, Wednesday, 10 January 2018 7:25:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
To Not_Now.Soon.
Saying <In our systems of justice, even though it is flawed, the death penalty is justified for those who commit crimes that warrant the penalty> is not a justification for the death penalty.
What you are saying is, in effect, the death penalty is justified because it is justified!
Also, in Australia’s “system of justice” we do not have the death penalty.........
Can you think if a reason the death penalty is better than what we have now?
Posted by Ashbo, Saturday, 13 January 2018 6:27:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
To Banjo.
I think we can all agree that “Justice, even if it flawed justice, is better than injustice”.
All this statement does is describe the current state of affairs – it says nothing that might be seen as supporting capital punishment.
May i also say your quotes from Bentham’s “A Treatise on Judicial Evidence” are completely out of context and misrepresent his thoughts.
You quote the last few sentences of a section entitled:
“In criminal matters, and above all, in serious offences, the presumption ought to be in favour of innocence: or, at least, it is necessary to proceed as if this presumption were established”
You then claim that Bentham’s “premonition” has proved correct! What utter rubbish you then come up with.
Your second quote is, if at all possible, is even more dishonestly used by you. Bentham was discussing Civil cases and not Criminal trials when he argued for Judges to favour Plaintiffs over Defendants (unless of course the evidence suggested otherwise).
Posted by Ashbo, Saturday, 13 January 2018 6:29:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 26
  7. 27
  8. 28
  9. Page 29
  10. 30
  11. 31
  12. 32
  13. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy