Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
@jen_jen wrote:
@Wordsworth50 wrote:
@mrs_teapot wrote:
If everyone believed in an Eye for an Eye… the world would be blind.
Not sure who said this its a quote in my diary.
If anyone’s interested in theological points, the original use of “an eye for an eye” referred to damage to babies in the womb. With all we are supposed to worry about today about drinking, smoking, environmental factors like fumes and x-rays, that would have some scary implications if taken to the nth degree.
It was Mahatma Gandhi Mrs T.
Words, I thought “an eye for an eye” came from the Old Testament and was intended to limit punishment, i.e. many crimes were punishable by death, but when it came to personal injury then it should be like for like – a life for a life, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a hand for a hand etc. Interestingly we now associate it with Muslim law but it was also a part of Hebrew law.
Exodus 21:23-25 (King James Version)
23 And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,
24 Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,
25 Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
That’s right Jen, but if you look at verse 21 and 22 you’ll see the context if harm is done to the unborn child
@thin ice wrote:
chapter 1 and 2 were funny
chapter 3 lacks any thrust
a bit to similar
you need some thing to grab our attention :PYou can’t expect a name check in ever episode Thin!
8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8)
@thin ice wrote:
what about cheating on your seriously ill husband
what punishment for that
hmmmmThin, it’s a shame that you’re hijacking this for unrelated personal point-scoring. Bootscardgate was dead and buried as far as I know, so the “joke” is wearing a bit thin (see what I did there?).
And is it the cheating or the serious illness that suggests punishment to you?
@mrs_teapot wrote:
If everyone believed in an Eye for an Eye… the world would be blind.
Not sure who said this its a quote in my diary.
If anyone’s interested in theological points, the original use of “an eye for an eye” referred to damage to babies in the womb. With all we are supposed to worry about today about drinking, smoking, environmental factors like fumes and x-rays, that would have some scary implications if taken to the nth degree.
@Wordsworth50 wrote:
If it had been my daughter I would not want to stop at disfigurement.
Taffyfish, what I meant when I said that was that if it was my daughter I would have wanted to kill him slowly, painfully and savagely, not just injure him. Does that answer your question? It might be worth reading the rest of my comments on the subject.
No prison would be harsh enough for anyone who hurt someone I care for. But my personal vengeance would help put society into a dark age as the associates of the avengee would want their revenge on me and on and on and on. And believe me, if it did happen, pray you were not nearby because I would be even less concerned about collateral damage than Tony Blair.
So please don’t try to dismiss my comments by suggesting that I would be happy to see the killer of my kid in any kind of ‘luxury’. It does you no favours and is insulting.
Bless you Mrs T, if only I’d known I had a future in politics, I have behaved better!
8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8)
@mrs_teapot wrote:
Maybe she has a point and we should keep our noses out of other peoples cultures?
The world is too small for that, especially now. We belong to international communities that claim to reflect certain values. Iran still remains a trading partner for certain goods and we would want our people there to be safe to do business or to live if they so wish.
We also have a right to our opinion and are free to state it from our own cultural viewpoint. It remains the right of the sovereign state to decide what its laws will be. But lawmaking bodies will take international practices and opinions into account.
So our legitimate contribution is to spur them to at least consider factors such as safeguards for the innocent and boundaries to prevent state justice from spilling over into personal vendettas.
Hard cases make bad law. Any legislative body needs to consider whether the particular needs of one person can meet the needs of an entire nation. It is at points in time like this, when a nation’s culture is about to change that alternative opinions can temper or even change the course of history.
@eve wrote:
This is a difficult subject to judge and we obviously all hold different opinion.
I can only say that had it been my daughter he disfigured i would, without hesitation or regret, have flung the acid at him. However, it would have been over his ba lls and not his face.
If it had been my daughter I would not want to stop at disfigurement. That’s precisely why we as a society have to wrestle with these issues because, complain as we might about the justice system in the UK, none of us are actually volunteering to move to Iran. Vengeance in this type of case is completely justified, but completely destructive to the avenger, the avenged and the society as a whole. Revenge bears bitter fruit.
A justice system which punishes disfigurement by creating another disfigured person is balanced but still unfair. That evil monster must have known the possible sentence he could get, but it didn’t deter him from carrying out his deed. His agony and disfigurement will not restore one flash of sight, one dot of skin nor erase one moment of pain for the victim.
One of the duties of state justice is to provide sufficient punishment to satisfy the injured that their hurt is recognised. Our criminal justice system probably focuses too much on the needs of wider society, relying on an inadequate compensation system and a piecemeal approach to victims support to make up the ground on a personal level.
But we have enough problems caused by successive governments aping the US without looking to Iran for our social model.
occupants of the taxi
Crimes against children feel worse than most others, but all lives are valuable.
I wish I could offer an answer, but better minds than mine have failed. The path of retribution has been tried and it delivers the kind of society most of us wouldn’t want to belong to.
Remember the lynch mob mentality about paedophiles a few years ago, unfortunately it delivered a lot of paranoia and little real justice.
One test of any system is how it works for the wrongly accused or wrongly convicted and there have been some high profile cases recently.
Difficult.
