Yesterday, Brian Dorsey was executed for a crime he committed in 2006. By all accounts, during his time in prison, he became remorseful for his actions and was a “model prisoner,” to the point that multiple corrections officers backed his petition for clemency.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/09/us/brian-dorsey-missouri-execution-tuesday/index.html
In general, the media is painting him as the victim of a justice system that fails to recognize rehabilitation. I find this idea disgusting. Brian Dorsey, in a drug-induced stupor, murdered the people who gave him shelter. He brutally ended the life of a woman and her husband, and (allegedly) sexually assaulted her corpse. There is an argument that he had ineffective legal representation, but that doesn’t negate the fact that he is guilty.
While I do believe that he could have been released or had his sentence converted to life in prison, and he could have potentially been a model citizen, this would have been a perversion of justice. Actions that someone takes after committing a barbaric act do not undo the damage that was done. Those two individuals are still dead, and he needed to face the ramifications for his actions.
Rehabilitation should not be an option for someone who committed crimes as depraved as he did. Quite frankly, a lethal injection was far less than what he deserved, given the horror he inflicted on others. If the punishment should fit the crime, then he was given far more leniency than was warranted.
That’s a child’s life. It hasn’t done wrong. The adult did wrong.
I get the logic. I just don’t agree with it. I think life is sacred but I don’t have an issue with abortion.
Since I’m against the death penalty does that make my a hypocrite ?
It’s why I don’t like to link the two. Otherwise pro-choice people should be pro-death mentally. The two are very different.
The difference is that I don’t think most pro-choice people think life is sacred. For myself, I believe the killing is primarily wrong due to the suffering it causes, and also due to preventing further joy in that person’s life.
Abortions don’t cause much, if any suffering, and the effects on future joy are ambiguous. I don’t think the available evidence in this framework supports banning abortions, which itself clearly does cause suffering.
In contrast, if you believe life is sacred, it’s very strange to then decide to defile or destroy this sacred thing for any reason. The sacred is not subject to this sort of cost and benefit analysis.
I think all life is sacred. Doesn’t mean it doesn’t need to terminated at some point but we need to do it only when necessary. I grew up Catholic. The host is sacred but we still ate it. It just means you treat it with respect.
If you can respectfully execute, why can’t you respectfully abort? I don’t see much difference. The point is that if life is fundamentally sacred, why is guilt or innocence even a factor in that sacredness?
I’m not against abortion.
Fair enough, I misread above. But the point still stands—I think you can link the two for pro-life but it doesn’t hold up for pro-choice.
Also, you got some spicy downvoters lol. Not sure what you said or who is even in this 8-day old thread besides us. Looks like it’s every comment of yours… did you piss someone off enough that they sent a bot squad after you?
Yes. There is a guy who has multiple account that follows me around to downvote me. He has about 12 accounts but typically uses three
I’m pointing out that they are saying life is sacred but they mean only some lives are sacred.
Trying to reverse that doesn’t make any sense and it’s part of the circular reasoning that you seem to have mastered.