Maybe it’s my psych degree, but I refuse to believe that any human is completely irredeemable. While many mental illnesses cannot be ‘cured’ in a traditional sense, they can be treated and even incredibly dangerous people can heal. When you kill someone, you remove their chance to heal forever.
There’s just no excuse for capital punishment. It’s a vile practice done for the benefit of other people’s perverted sense of justice.
Firstly, I’m anti capital punishment just to get that out of the way. Second I generally agree any given human is redeemable but I don’t actually know everyone so I won’t pretend that’s factual and I’d be open to the fact that’s actually not true. However I guess my question/point is if everyone was literally “redeemable” what does that actually mean or look like? and what process is actually reasonable to redeem people? If someone is a born psychopath, a repeat violent and sexual offender, how much time, energy and money should be put into redeeming them? What if a person doesn’t want to be redeemed? If you don’t do therapy with an open heart and receptive mind it won’t work I can’t imagine redeeming someone like who I described would be consensual and at that point… is it possible? Is nonconsensual redemption ethical?
It’s nice to think there’s a path for all of us that could lead somewhere good but reality is not everyone gets to be ok, even if you stripped every factor from the equation except biology, that would still be true.
The reason I am against capital punishment isn’t because I think every person is redeemable, even if most could be, it’s because I don’t trust the state to kill only those guilty and worthy of such a final judgment.
Maybe it’s my psych degree, but I refuse to believe that any human is completely irredeemable. While many mental illnesses cannot be ‘cured’ in a traditional sense, they can be treated and even incredibly dangerous people can heal. When you kill someone, you remove their chance to heal forever.
There’s just no excuse for capital punishment. It’s a vile practice done for the benefit of other people’s perverted sense of justice.
Firstly, I’m anti capital punishment just to get that out of the way. Second I generally agree any given human is redeemable but I don’t actually know everyone so I won’t pretend that’s factual and I’d be open to the fact that’s actually not true. However I guess my question/point is if everyone was literally “redeemable” what does that actually mean or look like? and what process is actually reasonable to redeem people? If someone is a born psychopath, a repeat violent and sexual offender, how much time, energy and money should be put into redeeming them? What if a person doesn’t want to be redeemed? If you don’t do therapy with an open heart and receptive mind it won’t work I can’t imagine redeeming someone like who I described would be consensual and at that point… is it possible? Is nonconsensual redemption ethical?
It’s nice to think there’s a path for all of us that could lead somewhere good but reality is not everyone gets to be ok, even if you stripped every factor from the equation except biology, that would still be true.
The reason I am against capital punishment isn’t because I think every person is redeemable, even if most could be, it’s because I don’t trust the state to kill only those guilty and worthy of such a final judgment.