votes

Mar 13, 2005 16:18

here are my votes on these debates:
now that took awhile )

Leave a comment

Comments 10

somnambulisa March 14 2005, 03:58:17 UTC
Anyone who read all that deserves a dozen donuts. I'm glad I only have to vote on one of the debates, as even that is a difficult decision for me. I'm going to wait and consider the other judge's reasonings for their votes on it, first. How long do we have?

Reply

killtacular March 14 2005, 04:01:03 UTC
heh, it was somewhat fun to read, considering I had nothing to do on a sunday afternoon. I think the__lord said monday at noon he wanted all judgments in, but I'm not sure how strict a deadline it is.

Reply


ex_lovecraf March 14 2005, 04:32:56 UTC
However, I would have liked to see an argument from lovecrafty specifically detailing why the death penalty is wrong prima facia.In short the argument would look like this ( ... )

Reply

killtacular March 14 2005, 05:43:56 UTC
ok, that's pretty much what I envisioned, at least that or something about an inherently suspicious nature towards government power, and thus not entrust the power to take life in cold blood to the government.

however, your final view also seems somewhat reasonable, although I still have problems with a punishment-based criminal outlook generally.

Reply


the_lance March 14 2005, 05:25:58 UTC
Detterence?

1. If potential death isn't a detterent, what is to any logical actor?
2. It's called the justice department, not the detterence department for a reason. You don't solely punish a robber based on whether or not he or she will do it again, you punish a robber to bring justice. If detterence was the principle issue, we wouldn't be making laws the way we do and we certainly wouldn't be prosecuting them that way either.

Reply

killtacular March 14 2005, 05:47:04 UTC
right. the point was I didn't find a positive justification for the death penalty in your response. I got

"think almost everyone agrees that the system could use some work (as you have described above) but that doesn't make the Death Penalty as a method of punishment and deterrent wrong. Just because police sometimes get out of hand doesn't mean we disband the police force."
.

fine. but this doesn't mean that the death penalty is right. you needed something to argue for this: deterrence was the only plausible self-evident one: you have to give a moral argument for why anyone deserves to die, and since i didn't see one I gave the vote to lovecrafty

Reply

the_lance March 14 2005, 05:51:27 UTC
I believe that as the home team, lovecraft had an obligation to prove his position to be true since he is allowed to frame the debate in whatever fashion he wishes. I concerned myself to discrediting his arguments, not to necessarily prove that the death penalty is always right but that it is not always wrong.

I respect your view and understand your decision, just wanted to make a case on why recognizing who is framing the debate changes perspective.

Reply

killtacular March 14 2005, 07:41:04 UTC
ya, there is definitely something to that. I guess the rules for how to judge are still being formulated: does the away team get presumption (ie, if no one positively demonstrates for their case, away wins) or not? I guess we'll have to see which one works better.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up