Because if so, we can just part ways there because that is utter anathema to me

Show Post

But yeah, this conversation is going in lots of different directions. So let me just ask, do you think people accused of certain crimes against whom the government puts forth very strong evidence should be totally unable to defend themselves and simply await their execution?

Show Post

What does non-adversarial mean to you though? I'm not attached to how we describe the system, but I am attached to people's rights. If it means "without input from the person we're thinking about executing" then I am immovably opposed.

Show Post

I hadn't yet read your view about free will/guilt, etc., so I see how I mischaracterized your opinion there. Sorry for that.

Show Post

And I mean, getting pushed into a 400 foot hole is just a punishment. What's the process by which we get there? Who gets to decide, and how is it not government by lynch mob (who were also fully convinced of their moral righteousness AND factual correctness)

Show Post