• Doug Holland@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m not so much concerned that it’s ‘worse’, as that people will say it’s ‘better’, as in, “Ain’t it swell that we’ve figured out a kind and courteous way to execute people, so why not use it more often?”

        • Doug Holland@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yup. I’m against even the warmest and fuzziest killing as punishment for a crime someone’s already in prison for.

          • EdibleFriend@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            1 year ago

            So…keep it inhumane? That’s what you want. They must suffer so the public is more opposed to the death penalty.

              • EdibleFriend@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                That’s not the discussion right now and more importantly it’s not happening anytime soon. As I said I am completely opposed to the death penalty as well. I will admit I think people out there simply deserve to die but I don’t trust the state to make that call with 100% accuracy.

                But right now we are talking about the humanity of nitrogen versus the electric chair. When I asked how nitrogen is worse then the electric chair is response is that if we make the death penalty more humane it will be used more.

                So…again… somehow this discussion has turned into how the death penalty must remain inhumane as a deterrent to using it. We must make them suffer in death so that the general public feels bad that they died. That is the current argument that I am questioning. Because, personally, I find that to be pretty disgusting.

                • Chetzemoka@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  “Don’t” is an implicit option that can and should be promoted anytime “how” we execute people is brought up. I’m not interested in splitting moral hairs about something that is always morally wrong.

                  • EdibleFriend@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    Ok so…basically just putting your fingers in your ears and screaming that the current world doesn’t exist. Got ya. Also…I love that you say choosing between making a man die in extreme pain or allowing him to die peacefully is ‘splitting moral hairs’.

                    That is literally how you view human life.