• surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Well, that’s another very interesting debate. Are the laws of a country what is written on the paper, or how things actually get enforced? One could say that America’s laws are (mostly) not racist, but how it gets enforced absolutely is, isn’t it?

    If throwing a rock gets you shot, and society allows that to happen regularly, then that is the punishment for that crime. You can dislike it, and that society can dislike it, but it is what it is. Isn’t it?

    • pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’re tap-dancing around the point. Killing that boy is regarded as a human rights violation and your opponent wants you to address the crime as one.

      As if it would fuckin’ matter which country it was in anyway. Murder is universally banned in all countries. It’s one of the few universal morals humanity has.

      • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        The proposed punishment is the one written in law. But if no one ever receives that punishment, then that’s not the punishment, is it?

      • pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re missing the point too. In fact, by your logic, genocide is legal. Laws are used to do evil things and they’re not the source of morality nor do they dictate right and wrong.