achad.net

I am quite baffled lately by the number of individuals who claim to think in a rational manner, yet are not bothered by their severe cognitive dissonance.

Such individuals will make the claim that abortion is wrong on the grounds that life is sacred, and then turn around and support the death penalty. If the taking of anything resembling life (e.g. a fetus) in any case (e.g. the mother will die if it is not aborted) is wrong, then why is capital punishment okay?

This statement, in particular, troubled me:

Agreed…that is what is wrong with our legal system, we know they did it, just kill them already. Insane? who cares, they won’t be productive citizens anyway so why keep them alive in a prison for 40yrs?

According to the statement’s author “we know they did it.” If we knew that the person committed the criminal act supposedly worthy of capital punishment, the verdict would be in already. The point of the legal system is not to administer a punishment based on gut feelings (i.e. “oh man, he totally did it. just look at him!”) but rather to only administer said punishment when proof *beyond a reasonable doubt* is presented. Many innocent people have been put to death even when this guideline was followed. Evidence has turned up vindicating a supposed killer while he was on the table ready to die, or even immediately afterward. Good thing we “knew” they did it.

So let’s suppose the person is mentally unstable. We should just kill them simply because they won’t be productive in our society? Okay, let’s kill all of the mentally retarded, the 1% of the population with schizophrenia (or another 1% with epilepsy or another N% with chronic pain. . .or or or. . .) who may have a disease so severe that they simply cannot be productive. First, let’s set arbitrary standards of productivity, then let’s euthanize half the population! YEAH! RIGHT TO LIFE!

This sentiment is inconsistent with the other beliefs held by the typical population expressing it, is irrational, cruel at best, and completely idiotic in any case.

Epilepsy can emerge at any time in one’s life, completely out of the blue. It might not respond to any treatment, and may render the afflicted “unproductive” in society. Maybe the “rational conservative” above will develop it and become unproductive. Will he still believe unproductive members of society should be put to death? Or will he realize that “life is sacred” for him, just as it is for his precious foetuses?

There is a reason we protect those being tried for crimes. An arrest does not imply guilt. Trials, evidence, habeas corpus, etc were not invented for no reason. They were put into place after many centuries of legal precedent demonstrated their necessity. Those who would do away with these things often claim to be “real Americans,” and tell everyone else that they are un-American. I find this ironic, as the fascistic policies they would implement are quite prominent in third world nations. This segment of the population often tells protesters: “If you don’t like the way things are, why don’t you move?” To them I say: “Why don’t you?” After all, there are plenty of South American countries without habeas corpus, maybe they’d like to go see how that works out? Or maybe they could pick up a history book for once and see how these sorts of things often play out? I guarantee that a police state today would differ very little from a police state hundreds of years ago, except that today’s would be more dangerous as technology might make it more difficult to overthrow.

Warning: Raising your voice is no substitute for knowing what you’re talking about.