Does inherited punishment have a place in society?
I think we answered that question more than 2.000 years ago when we abandoned the Hammurabi Code for less aggressive and more rational concepts of justice - Cyrus Code for example -. No child should not pay for its father's crimes.
Does inherited punishment have a place in society?
In the catholic church they are still paying for the original sin, and god only knows how many generations have been doing it. Or maybe she doesn't know either. :smirk:
Reply to Gus LamarchPeople who take the law into their own hands can be law enforcement officers and high officials whose influence can override the law and as we know people will always exploit their status if they can benefit from it and they do in all cases.
The road to punish someone and get away with it is easier than assumed by society, what about ethics at the end of the day the child who inherited his father's punishment did nothing wrong and was not participating in the crime. Should he be punished regardless? Who should receive the punishment in this scenario and why? If at all.
committing suicide, he escaped the punishment written by law for murder.
He has already paid the biggest penalty, which is losing the possibility of continuing to exist. In your scenario, he - unconsciously - sentenced himself and paid his penalty. I very much doubt that the penalty enacted by the law would be much more severe than this.
Comments (8)
I think we answered that question more than 2.000 years ago when we abandoned the Hammurabi Code for less aggressive and more rational concepts of justice - Cyrus Code for example -. No child should not pay for its father's crimes.
In many ways yes. The most common use of this mode of justice today is justice done by people's own hands, without all the bureaucracy of the State.
In the catholic church they are still paying for the original sin, and god only knows how many generations have been doing it. Or maybe she doesn't know either. :smirk:
The road to punish someone and get away with it is easier than assumed by society, what about ethics at the end of the day the child who inherited his father's punishment did nothing wrong and was not participating in the crime. Should he be punished regardless? Who should receive the punishment in this scenario and why? If at all.
An innocent individual should not pay for crimes he did not commit. There is no logic in making him pay for something that was not made by his hands.
Quoting Lav87
Quoting Lav87
He has already paid the biggest penalty, which is losing the possibility of continuing to exist. In your scenario, he - unconsciously - sentenced himself and paid his penalty. I very much doubt that the penalty enacted by the law would be much more severe than this.