3 ms·
I don't know why you used two religious groups as your first examples of families, Sikh and Hindus. Religious people often treat people who are not family, as
by barrysteve 3y ago
I don't know why you used two religious groups as your first examples of families, Sikh and Hindus.
Religious people often treat people who are not family, as family. It doesn't take Einstein to figure out that families should band together when they look over and see their peer-families get implicated for crimes they didn't commit.
The Hitler argument makes little sense because you kill him. Retributive justice works best when it's paired with Mercy. Punish then pardon. Otherwise it's just pointless punishment.
Get Hitler do some rebuilding of the land he destroyed, face the widows of the sons he ordered to die, shake the hand of a Jewish holocaust survivor. Throw him into a zoo enclosure with one-way glass, in a straight jacket, and allow him to hear the epitaths of the survivors as they walk past his cell.
Why retribution has to end in physical punishment and killing, is beyond me. There are realities worse than death, which have nothing to do with violence.
One man, once captured by the state and social opinion, cannot be allowed the easy way out, of death-by-retributive-revenge.
Can we move past Hitler, why am I carrying around his mistakes like it matters in today's cyberpunk world...
- pauldenton 3y agoReligious people can treat members of their ingroup great. It's how they treat the outgroup that causes problems. That's the difference between Muslims dealing with other Muslims, and Muslims dealing with Jews living in the state of Israel
- ignorethefacts 3y ago[dead]