It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
So no forgiveness whatsoever? What if the inmate is nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize? What if the inmate can do much more to help society on the outside?
So I take it you're not a big fan of forgiving people. Well, that's obviously a fault that you should overcome. Without forgiveness there is no real closure. It's a painful thing.
Originally posted by spencerjohnstone
Tell that to the parents of that innocent young boy who was killed oks, See the responce you get from them.
When it comes to murdering a innocent kid no I am not big om forgiveness, how can you says its a fault of mines? Oh you killed my son, I forgive you? I do not think so.
Originally posted by DeusEx
I say that certain things are by their nature so terrible that we CANNOT forgive them, ever. The murder or rape of a child is a perfect example of a crime that cannot be allowed to happen repeatedly by the same offender, indeed, at all.
There are times when 'I'm sorry' doesn't cut it. 'I'm sorry' doesn't bring back the dead, only vindicates the criminal.
Originally posted by Rasobasi420
Dude, everything is forgivable. If you can't forgive, it leaves a weight on your soul that gets harder and harder to lift. I believe that if someone is truly sorry, not just death row sorry, but in his heart feels remourse and regret, then why not forgive?
Description of Hasty Generalization
This fallacy is committed when a person draws a conclusion about a population based on a sample that is not large enough. It has the following form:
1. Sample S, which is too small, is taken from population P.
2. Conclusion C is drawn about Population P based on S.
The person committing the fallacy is misusing the following type of reasoning, which is known variously as Inductive Generalization, Generalization, and Statistical Generalization:
1. X% of all observed A's are B''s.
2. Therefore X% of all A's are Bs.
The fallacy is committed when not enough A's are observed to warrant the conclusion. If enough A's are observed then the reasoning is not fallacious.
Description of Burden of Proof
Burden of Proof is a fallacy in which the burden of proof is placed on the wrong side. Another version occurs when a lack of evidence for side A is taken to be evidence for side B in cases in which the burden of proof actually rests on side B. A common name for this is an Appeal to Ignorance. This sort of reasoning typically has the following form:
1. Claim X is presented by side A and the burden of proof actually rests on side B.
2. Side B claims that X is false because there is no proof for X.
In many situations, one side has the burden of proof resting on it. This side is obligated to provide evidence for its position. The claim of the other side, the one that does not bear the burden of proof, is assumed to be true unless proven otherwise.
Description of Misleading Vividness
Misleading Vividness is a fallacy in which a very small number of particularly dramatic events are taken to outweigh a significant amount of statistical evidence. This sort of "reasoning" has the following form:
1. Dramatic or vivid event X occurs (and is not in accord with the majority of the statistical evidence) .
2. Therefore events of type X are likely to occur.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because the mere fact that an event is particularly vivid or dramatic does not make the event more likely to occur, especially in the face of significant statistical evidence.