Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Yes.

No.

Only for certain crimes. (Name please)

[Bauglir]

The pope can't possibly do that anymore. He has no dedicated army of templars anymore.

THAT'S WHAT HE WANTS YOU TO THINK.

HE'S SHAPING YOUR EXPECTATIONS. BEWARE OF SPAIN.

[Maggarg - Eater of chicke]

The pope can't possibly do that anymore. He has no dedicated army of templars anymore.

THAT'S WHAT HE WANTS YOU TO THINK.

HE'S SHAPING YOUR EXPECTATIONS. BEWARE OF SPAIN.

NO-ONE EXPECTS...

Did it really come to this? Damn I feel kind of bad for derailing.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

THE SPANISH INQUISITION!

[ChairmanPoo]

He could still excommunicate a nation, but can't start a war. The nation wouln't probably care much of the excommunication anyway.

Meh. Even in the papacy's glory days thwt sort of thing bsckfired as often as it did work.Look at the aragonese crusade for example

[Leatra]

I thought being a Mötley Crüe fan and advocating executions for drug users (while winking...) would have tipped you guys off that I was joking. Or that my 1st post in this thread advocated killing juveniles and the mentally ill, while praising Vlad the Impaler and Draco.

Actually, the biggest tip-off is that when people asked questions that were too difficult/put too large a hole in your argument, or when people accused you of trolling, you didn't respond.

... You're welcome >_> <_<

That made my day... Well, night.

[Dr.Feelgood]

message deleted

[Leafsnail]

Poe's Law.

[Vector]

That's why you got upset and stopped responding? The fact is several people spent over a dozen pages replying to increasingly obvious parody posts. In the future, if I praise any more mass murderers and advocate speedy executions for children I'll be sure to add a sly wink at the end of my posts.

No, but it was tipping me off to the troll idea.

You were very slick otherwise.  I'm honestly impressed.

[Bauglir]

That actually was a pretty good troll, not least because I've heard those exact arguments in actual churches before, just with less self-awareness >______>

I tend to assume that, after Poe's Law is brought up and somebody doesn't cop to it, they're being serious. And here I was giving you credit for at least being a logically consistent monster. I suppose given the particular argument trolling is the better explanation, but I still can't say I appreciate the derail for lulz.

[Soulwynd]

After giggling at several pages of trolling, I'm going to stick to the topic:

I voted maybe. I'm an anarchist at heart and I can't really say yes or no. Some people might want it, some people might not want it. I'd rather make it a case by case basis. If there's irrefutable proof, cases like murder, rape, or any sort of permanent damage (be is the loss of a limb or psychological damage) should fall in the category where the victim or the closest relatives can decide what to do with the felon. Unlimited. Including 50 years of non-stop torture. Of course, you have to fund your own sentence, but we'd kindly provide you with a gun if you're willing to pay for the bullet. It's in your own hands. You want to be forgiving and let the guy walk free. Sure thing. But if the dude commits further crimes, it's also your responsibility.

I honestly hate the idea of having imaginary entity responsible for executing any sort of judgement on a person. The fact is judges and juries are responsible for what happens to a given criminal and this magic entity removes this responsibility out of them. That's just wrong in my book.

Of course, as it is the case with any sort of 'justice' I'd still be worried about what can be considered irrefutable proof. The last thing I want are innocents or accidents falling into major penalties.

In fact, I think most crimes should never ever have jail time. The punishments should always be either financial or rehab of some kind.


As for the rape versus murder thing. I consider rape way way worse than murder.

[quinnr]

@Dr. Feelgood: Call me stupid, but I just tend to give the benefit of the doubt on the internet. Besides, it did spark some interesting discussion about morality and added a book to my list, so meh.

As for how I feel about the topic, I..don't think it matters too much. Call me a horrible person, but both of the main solutions (life in prison, murder) solve the issue, do they not? They both effectively stop all functions of the criminal, I fail to see a huge difference between the two.

I've been accused on several occasions of being an emotionless robot with no feelings, though...

[Soulwynd]

As for how I feel about the topic, I..don't think it matters too much. Call me a horrible person, but both of the main solutions (life in prison, murder) solve the issue, do they not? They both effectively stop all functions of the criminal, I fail to see a huge difference between the two.

You're a horrible person. You should know a dead criminal uses less resources than a living one.

=p

Why nobody has tried to develop commercial products out of human flesh yet? I wouldn't mind dead people, including my body afterwards, to be used for something... Instead of being burnt or buried. *shrugs*

[quinnr]

As for how I feel about the topic, I..don't think it matters too much. Call me a horrible person, but both of the main solutions (life in prison, murder) solve the issue, do they not? They both effectively stop all functions of the criminal, I fail to see a huge difference between the two.

You're a horrible person. You should know a dead criminal uses less resources than a living one.

=p

Why nobody has tried to develop commercial products out of human flesh yet? I wouldn't mind dead people, including my body afterwards, to be used for something... Instead of being burnt or buried. *shrugs*

You could always donate your body to science or something.
I don't think that converting human skin to leather would be that large of a difference from any other animal flesh. Can you imagine the commercials and advertising for that sort of stuff, though?

You could even price the stuff based on how 'bad' of a criminal the person was!
-------
But a lot of other people get upset about executions, so either way is the same outcome as far as stopping the criminal, just with different costs and people's morals getting in the way. So whichever way is most cost effective without upsetting a great deal of people?

[Soulwynd]

Not upsetting people? Impossible.

[Gamerlord]

Wait, Dr Feelgood wasn't being serious? 

[Max White]

Wait, Dr Feelgood wasn't being serious? 

The scary part is that it wasn't possible to tell right away. Poes law man, never fails.