When dealing with the third issue of the death penalty, I feel that people seemed to think that most of the people being put to death were innocent and were in the situation by mistake. The point is, these people did horrible things to other humans and deserved to be on Death Row. The idea that killing these criminals is a crime that should be punishable by death of the execute is just silly. Police Officers have the right to handcuff a person and lock them away in small rooms, but we as a society don't see this as wrong; they are simply doing their job.
I feel that the third issue didn't really have a strong effect on my principles, as I feel that these people deserve to be punished and removed from society because of the things that they have done. There are however certain mitigating circumstances in determining if someone should be put to death, such as if they have done great things in an effort to fix their mistakes or if there is a true spirit of repentance because of their actions. I think that each case must be taken into careful consideration and that there must be certain limitations placed on the practice.
I think that to properly judge certain issues such as these, a person must be well informed on a situation and should never be taken lightly. I agree with Aristotle in that people must act in moderation and should never lean too far in one direction or another. A person must be well informed and should never act too rashly if there is any doubt about a situation. A person must have compassion and understanding, and must be fair and just. That is what makes someone a better being.
Also, this week I commented on Alex's blog at http://ethicalwellbeing-richardsa.blogspot.com/.
