473
Trump rages at Biden for wrecking his plans for executions: ‘Makes no sense’
(www.thedailybeast.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 24 Dec 2024
473 points (99.0% liked)
politics
19246 readers
2601 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Back when slaves were legal it was illegal to kill a slave owner. I understand that and I think that's how it needed to be. You can't have laws that killing someone is legal.
On the other hand I don't morally condemn the slaves that rose up and actually did kill their "owners".
I absolutely can say something should be illegal but in certain cases I'm cool with it happening.
Did you just gloss over “then you need to change the law”? Maybe even my entire comment?
At no point did I ever say laws should guide our morals. I’m saying you don’t codify laws you don’t intend on following. Your slavery example is an irrelevant cheap shot that we both know does not reflect my position. Hell it’s not even relevant to yours. It’s an entirely different discussion on whether laws = morality when it should be our values informing our laws, none of which is the discussion af hand.
You said murder should be illegal but that you still condone it in some cases as you believe it’s the only effective solution. This is the discussion at hand. If you have special carve outs where you’re allowed to ignore the law based on your personal whims then the law is meaningless. You must alter the law or your stance, your two stated views are contradictory.
No I did not gloss over that. I'm not sure how you could miss my point that much.
I think my example is entirely relevant. The reason I sometimes condone murder is when I don't find it morally wrong, so obviously that's also what the discussion is about.
You're whole argument about not being able to condone a criminal act without having to change the laws makes very little sense to me.
I didn’t miss your point, you’re talking at cross purpose