Various Moral Issues

[GWH]

Good topic.
I'll add my comments on the issues i find interesting.

Transgendering is a medical/mental issue called body dysphoria which has evolved into a political issue.
I hope that when Trump is elected this insane trend will be more balanced towards common sense.

I agree that it is a mental illness, because transgendering is impossible unless one can change out the X & Y chromosomes.

I guess those who can afford to pay for medical experimentation should be free to do so, but NOT free to make those of us who are against it pay for it and NOT to force it upon minors, who will pay for it with body mutilation.

 

[GWH]

Little did I imagine that the status of pets would spark discussion under the topic of Biomedical Ethics! :^)

Moving right along, here is my suggestion for a moral issue that begins with the letter "C": Criminal Justice.

The current system of criminal justice in this country (U.S.) sometime seems to be more criminal than just. If I could, I would try to reform the system, but before sharing my idea it would be good to hear yours.

If anyone has discussed this issue, I missed it, so I will share my suggestion. I would try to make justice as objective and speedy as possible by assessing a monetary restitution and identify the victim(s) for every crime, especially felonies such as murder.

The punishment for people convicted of crimes would be to work for a specified minimum wage ten hours per day and six days per week. Their wages would be garnisheed 100% and sent to their victim(s) until the restitution was paid. Of course, no one could pay the penalty from other funds, so the length of the sentence is determined automatically.

This system eliminates plea-bargaining, parole, innocent by reason of insanity and death row. It does not eliminate the need for lawyers, but their role would be changed to determining guilt and the just consequence/restitution. Anyone who intentionally withheld information pertinent to establishing the truth and a fair penalty would be culpable of a crime.

What do y'all think? Any comments so far?

 

[hornetguy]

What monetary value do you put on a life? Are poor people ok to murder, because it won't take as long to pay it off?

 

[GWH]

What monetary value do you put on a life? Are poor people ok to murder, because it won't take as long to pay it off?

I suggest a lower amount for first time offenders whose criminal record would state that they have been briefed on this system so they have one chance to reform.
The amount would be the same for all who commit that crime and must be paid only from funds earned by working as I described.
I hope you are aware of how much more fair this is than the current injustice system.

 

[hornetguy]

So, the first time I murder someone, the fine won't be too bad.... and you still didn't say how the value of a human life would be calculated...

I'm not really sure I'm "aware" how much more "fair" this would be.

Perhaps for non-violent crimes.... it would actually make a little more sense in that case.... but if somone rapes your 12 year old daughter, what fine would you asses them?

 

[Magenta]

So for me, i see no problem with aliens existing and after asking them about
their history, it'd be a great opportunity to tell them about ours with Christ.

I see no problem with aliens existing either, though I would not assume they do not know God...

 

[ThereRoseaLamb]

I learned this just this morning:
In 1973, laws were written to protect pre-born sea turtles. Penalties included large fines and prison time. That same year, pre-born humans were allowed to be killed. The same people who placed a high value on turtles had no respect for human life.

And we wonder why America is in the mess it's in. smh

 

[Eli1]

I see no problem with aliens existing either, though I would not assume they do not know God...

True, they may know something .. but like the OP said, this is purely hypothetical so we won't know until we know.

 

[Cameron143]

So, the first time I murder someone, the fine won't be too bad.... and you still didn't say how the value of a human life would be calculated...

I'm not really sure I'm "aware" how much more "fair" this would be.

Perhaps for non-violent crimes.... it would actually make a little more sense in that case.... but if somone rapes your 12 year old daughter, what fine would you asses them?

Should always be careful to spell assess correctly.

 

[Lynx]

Should always be careful to spell assess correctly.

Verily the misspelling of one doth make donkeys of us all.

 

[GWH]

So, the first time I murder someone, the fine won't be too bad.... and you still didn't say how the value of a human life would be calculated...

I'm not really sure I'm "aware" how much more "fair" this would be.

Perhaps for non-violent crimes.... it would actually make a little more sense in that case.... but if somone rapes your 12 year old daughter, what fine would you asses them?

I think murder and rape are preceded by lesser crimes 99% of the time, at which time the person would be briefed/forewarned and entered in a national data base so that the next time would not be a lower penalty.

The value of human life would be calculated by the courts, just as they do now. Not sure why you do not think objectifying the process with a monetary penalty would be more fair, but let me continue sharing my idea by saying that the intent of this system is to maximize the probability of reforming criminals.

The assessed restitution mentioned previously would be minimal on the assumption that the prisoner would reform until their behavior indicates otherwise. To the initial restitution would be added a uniform (system-wide) surcharge (based on the length of the sentence) to partially recover the costs involved in rehabilitating a prisoner: food, lodging, job training, counseling, supervision, etc.

Ten percent or so of the surcharge would be put in a savings account, which the prisoner would be able to access when he/she is discharged.

The living situation would approximate as close as practical what the prisoner would need to function as a law-abiding citizen, including an efficiency apartment type of cell, so that the prisoner would do his/her own cooking and laundry. If a prisoner refused to work, then he/she would not be paid and thus the sentence would be lengthened. (cf. 2 THS 3:10)

 

[Subhumanoidal]

If anyone has discussed this issue, I missed it, so I will share my suggestion. I would try to make justice as objective and speedy as possible by assessing a monetary restitution and identify the victim(s) for every crime, especially felonies such as murder.

The punishment for people convicted of crimes would be to work for a specified minimum wage ten hours per day and six days per week. Their wages would be garnisheed 100% and sent to their victim(s) until the restitution was paid. Of course, no one could pay the penalty from other funds, so the length of the sentence is determined automatically.

This system eliminates plea-bargaining, parole, innocent by reason of insanity and death row. It does not eliminate the need for lawyers, but their role would be changed to determining guilt and the just consequence/restitution. Anyone who intentionally withheld information pertinent to establishing the truth and a fair penalty would be culpable of a crime.

What do y'all think? Any comments so far?

It wouldn't eliminate those that get the insanity defense. Because those people need treatment and things like jail or forced labor won't change that.
Also it's quite difficult to get an insanity plea. They do a lot of testing the individual as well as dig into the facts of the case. And it's reported that it's not a good plea, actually, since many say that getting it means going to a mental health facility instead. And they don't have the best of reputations. As well as being said going to one of those is worse than jail.
Not sure how exchanging jail for a job is going to make things any different. People still need to be tried and convicted. All you're really doing is exchanging punishments. Which means people will still have the right to plead guilty or not guilty. Which means plea deals could still be made.

Also how many companies want to hire murderers, thieves, rapists, kidnappers, pedophiles, violent offenders, etc...?
And what's to stop them from simply walking away and disappearing? It's basically giving their freedoms back and putting them back into society.

A specified wage would be pushed onto the companies that did hire them, and I can't see that being favorable to those companies.

If lawyers are there to provide two opposing sides of the argument how can they then determine guilt or innocence? Each lawyer will stick to their own side.

If they can even get hired, where do they live if they have no money?
Work release is seen as a reward for inmates with good behavior in prison. Inmates with violent crimes are not allowed work release. To now make it available to all people in prison sounds like a reward.

If you're caught interfering with a police investigation about a crime, including withholding evidence, it's already a crime. And can result in fines and/or jail. As can lying under oath in court.

Let's not forget to mention that letting all these people free for 10 hours a day increases their chances to smuggle drugs in (if they slept at the prison). Or put a hit on someone. Just have their buddies come in and sneak them a message green lighting an attack. Not to mention the increased risk of violence in the workplace.

I appreciate you trying to come up with an alternative idea, but given what I've stated I'm not seeing at all how it would work in real life.

 

[GWH]

It wouldn't eliminate those that get the insanity defense. Because those people need treatment and things like jail or forced labor won't change that.
Also it's quite difficult to get an insanity plea. They do a lot of testing the individual as well as dig into the facts of the case. And it's reported that it's not a good plea, actually, since many say that getting it means going to a mental health facility instead. And they don't have the best of reputations. As well as being said going to one of those is worse than jail.
Not sure how exchanging jail for a job is going to make things any different. People still need to be tried and convicted. All you're really doing is exchanging punishments. Which means people will still have the right to plead guilty or not guilty. Which means plea deals could still be made.

Also how many companies want to hire murderers, thieves, rapists, kidnappers, pedophiles, violent offenders, etc...?
And what's to stop them from simply walking away and disappearing? It's basically giving their freedoms back and putting them back into society.

A specified wage would be pushed onto the companies that did hire them, and I can't see that being favorable to those companies.

If lawyers are there to provide two opposing sides of the argument how can they then determine guilt or innocence? Each lawyer will stick to their own side.

If they can even get hired, where do they live if they have no money?
Work release is seen as a reward for inmates with good behavior in prison. Inmates with violent crimes are not allowed work release. To now make it available to all people in prison sounds like a reward.

If you're caught interfering with a police investigation about a crime, including withholding evidence, it's already a crime. And can result in fines and/or jail. As can lying under oath in court.

Let's not forget to mention that letting all these people free for 10 hours a day increases their chances to smuggle drugs in (if they slept at the prison). Or put a hit on someone. Just have their buddies come in and sneak them a message green lighting an attack. Not to mention the increased risk of violence in the workplace.

I appreciate you trying to come up with an alternative idea, but given what I've stated I'm not seeing at all how it would work in real life.

I appreciate your help with developing this idea. We might be amazed at how many so-called insane people would be helped by this program, but notice that I did include counseling as part of the regime. If they could not function in an efficiency cell, then a more restrictive environment could be mandated.

Yes, accused people would still need to be tried and convicted, but hopefully if the punishment is certain instead of so hit and miss as it is today, there will be an incentive to not be a repeat offender.

No, pleas would be rather irrelevant, because the role of lawyers would be determining guilt and the just consequence/restitution, and any lawyer who withheld information pertinent to establishing the truth and a fair penalty would be culpable of a crime. IOW, lawyers would be compelled to be on the side of truth and justice.

Perhaps job placement as well as training should be added to the mix, and a person who has paid his debt should not be labeled for life. The purpose of the savings account is to provide the necessities until the reformed person gets the first paycheck. Not sure what the reference to a specified wage means.

With this plan, the recidivism rate will become much lower for those who are released back into society, especially because those who commit another crime and are caught will be kept out of circulation much longer. I guess this is a form of work release, but it should be viewed as an appropriate consequence for good behavior rather than as an undeserved reward.

Those who commit a crime while in prison will have the appropriate monetary penalty added to their sentence, but this does raise a point that I will mention next time.

 

[Lynx]

No, pleas would be rather irrelevant, because the role of lawyers would be determining guilt and the just consequence/restitution, and any lawyer who withheld information pertinent to establishing the truth and a fair penalty would be culpable of a crime. IOW, lawyers would be compelled to be on the side of truth and justice.

Quote from a cartoon I once saw, in a court of law on another planet:

"Doesn't he get a court appointed lawyer or something?"

"We solved our lawyer problem centuries ago. You may speak on his behalf if you wish... But be aware that you will share his fate."

"But that's crazy!"

"That's how we solved our lawyer problem."

 

[gb9]

Quote from a cartoon I once saw, in a court of law on another planet:

"Doesn't he get a court appointed lawyer or something?"

"We solved our lawyer problem centuries ago. You may speak on his behalf if you wish... But be aware that you will share his fate."

"But that's crazy!"

"That's how we solved our lawyer problem."

now that is a good one!

 

[Subhumanoidal]

I appreciate your help with developing this idea. We might be amazed at how many so-called insane people would be helped by this program, but notice that I did include counseling as part of the regime. If they could not function in an efficiency cell, then a more restrictive environment could be mandated.

Yes, accused people would still need to be tried and convicted, but hopefully if the punishment is certain instead of so hit and miss as it is today, there will be an incentive to not be a repeat offender.

No, pleas would be rather irrelevant, because the role of lawyers would be determining guilt and the just consequence/restitution, and any lawyer who withheld information pertinent to establishing the truth and a fair penalty would be culpable of a crime. IOW, lawyers would be compelled to be on the side of truth and justice.

Perhaps job placement as well as training should be added to the mix, and a person who has paid his debt should not be labeled for life. The purpose of the savings account is to provide the necessities until the reformed person gets the first paycheck. Not sure what the reference to a specified wage means.

With this plan, the recidivism rate will become much lower for those who are released back into society, especially because those who commit another crime and are caught will be kept out of circulation much longer. I guess this is a form of work release, but it should be viewed as an appropriate consequence for good behavior rather than as an undeserved reward.

Those who commit a crime while in prison will have the appropriate monetary penalty added to their sentence, but this does raise a point that I will mention next time.

Still can't say I agree.
How might the transportation of 100's of inmates at different times and locations be handled? Doing so would require so much money into buying new vans, van maintenence, gas, etc.. not to mention the extra cost for all the drivers. And all those drivers, which would all first need experience working with inmates and training. As well as insurance.
Since many prisons already suffer from being understaffed how would this all be worked out?

How would you stop the inflow of drugs and other paraphernalia? As it stands now their calls are monitored to make it more difficult for them to pass messages, such as calling a shot or organize ways to sneak in drugs and such. Freeing then 10 hours a day gives them 10 hours a day a chance to communicate unmonitored.

To quote you "The punishment for people convicted of crimes would be to work for a specified minimum wage ten hours per day and six days per week".

So this means giving 10 hours a day of freedom to those that have done horrific things. Serial rapists, pedophiles (which are typically repeat offenders whose fear of being murdered in prison doesn't deter them) and serial murderers.

Eliminating anything going on a permanent record? So if a pedophile actually managed to pay off restitution people would no longer have the ability to know when they moved to their neighborhood? And they would be free to live anywhere, including next to schools? Take jobs working with kids?
Same goes for rapists. No more sex offender lists. And I'm sure they wouldn't abuse their jobs by targeting victims (even in prison) and use that 10 hours a day to call someone else to assault or kidnap them. Especially those involved in human trafficking.

What if they amount they get paid goes to is higher in one state than another? Two people that commit the same crime would take different amounts of time to pay it off. Is that "fair"?
What if the specified amount of payment is higher or lower than the payment of regular employees? Does the employer have to face looking to be viewed as underpaying employees? Or what if the criminal is paid more than other employees? How well do you think that would go over?
Not to mention 10 hour shifts would involve overtime. 60 hours of overtime each week, which would mean a higher rate of pay for the employer to have to shell out.

I could go on with issues I see of practical limitations of implementing this idea, but you've not even responded to all of my original ones. Nor have you put a price for the value of a person, as requested twice by another user.
You don't feel it invalidates your idea when you have no answers to genuine problems presented?

For me this is akin to opening the borders to illegal immigrants... Oops they've already done that and it hasn't worked out so well.

 

[GWH]

Still can't say I agree.
How might the transportation of 100's of inmates at different times and locations be handled? Doing so would require so much money into buying new vans, van maintenence, gas, etc.. not to mention the extra cost for all the drivers. And all those drivers, which would all first need experience working with inmates and training. As well as insurance.
Since many prisons already suffer from being understaffed how would this all be worked out?

How would you stop the inflow of drugs and other paraphernalia? As it stands now their calls are monitored to make it more difficult for them to pass messages, such as calling a shot or organize ways to sneak in drugs and such. Freeing then 10 hours a day gives them 10 hours a day a chance to communicate unmonitored.

To quote you "The punishment for people convicted of crimes would be to work for a specified minimum wage ten hours per day and six days per week".

So this means giving 10 hours a day of freedom to those that have done horrific things. Serial rapists, pedophiles (which are typically repeat offenders whose fear of being murdered in prison doesn't deter them) and serial murderers.

Eliminating anything going on a permanent record? So if a pedophile actually managed to pay off restitution people would no longer have the ability to know when they moved to their neighborhood? And they would be free to live anywhere, including next to schools? Take jobs working with kids?
Same goes for rapists. No more sex offender lists. And I'm sure they wouldn't abuse their jobs by targeting victims (even in prison) and use that 10 hours a day to call someone else to assault or kidnap them. Especially those involved in human trafficking.

What if they amount they get paid goes to is higher in one state than another? Two people that commit the same crime would take different amounts of time to pay it off. Is that "fair"?
What if the specified amount of payment is higher or lower than the payment of regular employees? Does the employer have to face looking to be viewed as underpaying employees? Or what if the criminal is paid more than other employees? How well do you think that would go over?
Not to mention 10 hour shifts would involve overtime. 60 hours of overtime each week, which would mean a higher rate of pay for the employer to have to shell out.

I could go on with issues I see of practical limitations of implementing this idea, but you've not even responded to all of my original ones. Nor have you put a price for the value of a person, as requested twice by another user.
You don't feel it invalidates your idea when you have no answers to genuine problems presented?

For me this is akin to opening the borders to illegal immigrants... Oops they've already done that and it hasn't worked out so well.

Does saying you disagree mean that you agree with the current system of justice?

I see that you misunderstood the work situation, which would be monitored in the prisons as it is done now.

The only permanent record I mentioned was that the criminal had been briefed regarding the rules of the new system, so ignorance of the warning would not be a possible excuse.

I agree with your saying that sex offenders might need to be restricted in the ways you mentioned, although what I will say next regarding repeat offenders will address that problem in a more permanent way.

I am not aware of issues that I have not responded to, but I know that I said "The value of human life would be calculated by the courts, just as they do now."

Now for the rest of my idea: Prisoners who failed to reform but instead damaged property, injured people or committed some other illegal act would have the punishment for that crime added to their original sentence until such misbehavior reaches some maximum, say 100 years, at which point they would be executed. Thus, the prison population would be reduced if recidivism occurs, and criminals would cost society no longer.

Over...

 

[Lynx]

I see that you misunderstood the work situation, which would be monitored in the prisons as it is done now.

Subhumanoidal may have some flaws, but I can almost guarantee he does not misunderstand something he makes a statement on. If he says something, he has looked into whatever he is talking about and comprehends it pretty well.

 

[daisyseesthesun]

I agree that it is a mental illness, because transgendering is impossible unless one can change out the X & Y chromosomes.

I guess those who can afford to pay for medical experimentation should be free to do so, but NOT free to make those of us who are against it pay for it and NOT to force it upon minors, who will pay for it with body mutilation.

This subject really is upsetting. You know I wouldn't care what they did if the stayed in there own yard. "That his"em that their"sum and this is yours"ism" as my great grandma use to say. But what they are doing effect the entire female population. If a woman said the were a man and then suddenly said the were better then you in every single way Not one man would stand for it. the fact that men can say they are woman and get-a-way with it and take over are rights proves that they are in fact men. When I was in school I never had to compete with a men that could smash my skull in. I never had to worry about men in my bathroom/locker roo. Or taking my trophy or crown away. I never had to worry about competing against a man that spray paints makeup on. Now society is normalizing men with long hair in man buns to further this dreadful plight girls and woman are in. I mourn this generations daughters.

 

[GWH]

This subject really is upsetting. You know I wouldn't care what they did if the stayed in there own yard. "That his"em that their"sum and this is yours"ism" as my great grandma use to say. But what they are doing effect the entire female population. If a woman said the were a man and then suddenly said the were better then you in every single way Not one man would stand for it. the fact that men can say they are woman and get-a-way with it and take over are rights proves that they are in fact men. When I was in school I never had to compete with a men that could smash my skull in. I never had to worry about men in my bathroom/locker roo. Or taking my trophy or crown away. I never had to worry about competing against a man that spray paints makeup on. Now society is normalizing men with long hair in man buns to further this dreadful plight girls and woman are in. I mourn this generations daughters.

Yes, but at least this issue is a bridge too far and has awakened most of society to realize that tolerance sometimes abets evil instead of being good.