• lorez
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Sadism would be torturing an innocent. She’s far from that. And she won’t spend her life in prison so she won’t even get the punishment inflicted by the law. They’ll kill her before long. Why all this grace reserved to an angel of death?

      • lorez
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Such a being doesn’t deserve decency.

              • lorez
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                I bet it wasn’t used to describe an angel of death…

                • Apollo@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  No, it was used to describe Jews, Roma, Homosexuals, Communists, and pretty much everybody the Nazis disliked.

                  As the poster further up the chain said, decency is for everyone or it is not decent.

                  • lorez
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    10 months ago

                    I disagree. I’m not talking about some group of people some other group doesn’t like, but somebody who’s universally despised, somebody who does things so against our nature it’s nuts. Some people deserve decency, some others do not.

    • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      “But then we’re no better than them!”

      This moral purism of theirs is hypocritical. It can only exist if there are good people who are “impure”. The threat of violence for instance is what keeps wanton violence at bay. Someone can be as pacifistic as they like, but at the end of the day, you aren’t going to solve all violence in the world with clever words.

      • Alien Nathan Edward
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        the threat of violence is what keeps wanton violence at bay

        Given that the threat of violence did absolutely nothing to keep this violence at bay I’d love for you to expound upon this point further.

        • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          I’m referring to the general theory of government where the state has a monopoly on violence. It should be fairly obvious that the threat of violence is used to keep people in line – it’s why police, security guards, and bouncers exist. Why do you think guards and soldiers are some of the world’s oldest professions?

        • lorez
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          We didn’t threaten her or any other serial killer in countries where there’s no death penalty with violence. But death is too swift a punishment.