I often hear people stating that they do not feel comfortable giving their government the power to end a person's life--the reason being that an institution conceived of and administered by human beings is inherently flawed, and that this power over life and death should not be trusted to such an institution.
Also...
I often hear people stating that they do not feel comfortable giving their government the power to administrate a healthcare system--the reason being that the government cannot be trusted to do a good job at anything, i.e. delivering mail, etc. therefore this power should not be trusted to such an institution.
What happens when you throw all of these assessments together and try to make them work in the same reality?
__________________
Quote:
|
...cases of kidnapping, rape, and murder are all worthy of the death penalty in my opinion...
|
You don't think that some objective assessment of
whether the person is actually guilty or not should factor into this (other than the original verdict of guilty, the 100% reliability of which is precisely what is at question here)? Let me be more clear: if an innocent person is wrongly convicted of something
really bad how does that make them
more guilty than an innocent person convicted of a lesser offense?