Which do you prefer, to punish the guilty or to reduce the rate of immorality?

Recently, the Abortion debate has reared its ugly head, and it got me thinking about something. One of the points I bring up in the various threads I've participated (and even authored one featuring it) is that abortion rates are higher or the same in countries where the procedure is illegal. This was curious to me because it is also true for drugs, alcohol, and even sex. Heck JUST the FEAR of banning guns sends gun buying through the roof.

So naturally, when I bring up this little bit about abortion rates in the abortion threads, I get push back from the abortion = murder crowd. One of the responses I saw was, "what if it can be shown that making murder legal would reduce the rate of murder, would you legalize it?" This was a very FAIR question that I feel got buried in my thread, but since then, I've grown to feel that the answer could be expanded on in its own thread. HOWEVER, I think the question should be framed differently. So we come to my thread title.

Are you more concerned with punishing the guilty or do you want to reduce the rate of immorality?

Let's look at some statistics before I give my personal answer to the question then. It probably isn't a surprise to many here on ATS, but the USA has the highest incarceration rate in the world. If that was a surprise to you, then welcome to ATS! In countries such as Portugal, that have decriminalize drugs and seek to rehabilitate usage, they have seen ASTOUNDING success rates (see previous link on drugs in the thread). Abortions in countries that have made the procedure also tend to be more dangerous for the mother. If you go to prison once in your lifetime, you have a 52% chance of returning. Educating kids to practice safe sex has led to an all time low teen pregnancy rate. Clearly we cannot have both options here.

Now it's time to get a bit religious with everyone.

Here is Luke 6:37
"Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven."

Luke 6:29
"Whoever hits you on the cheek, offer him the other also; and whoever takes away your coat, do not withhold your shirt from him either."

Buddhism preaches pacifism. The Muslim religion is called the "Religion of Peace". Many different religions teach various forms of not judging or being violent to others.

Could it be possible that science is lining up with religion in this regard? Stop worrying about punishing the guilty. Worry about correcting the wrong. Worry about yourself and not what others are doing. If it is to be, they will suffer for their transgressions. If not, oh well, it isn't going to change your life or your destiny any.

So to finally answer the question in the OP (though I'm sure many already get an idea of where I'm going with this), I prefer reducing the rate of immorality over punishing the guilty.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Is your question specific to murder (as listed within the post) or a generalization?

a reply to: angryhulk

It's a generalization. I could easily frame a similar question, "If it can be shown that making stealing legal would reduce the rate of stealing, would you legalize it" I would answer similarly. Of course, keep in mind, there is more that needs to be done then JUST legalizing it (or at least decriminalizing it). There needs to be education explaining that stealing is wrong, and proper social context to analyze how we can relate that to a young mind so they WANT to not steal things.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Abortion rates are higher everywhere because people no longer have to face the consequences of their actions.

Responsibility has been absolved from the individual.

Use religion, abuse religion, justify it however you wish.

If the individual took responsibility for their sexual actions, then there'd not be the abortions we see.

QED

a reply to: Krazysh0t

As a generalization I am probably leaning towards reducing the rate of immorality. I think a lot more can be done with most individuals when it comes to numerous topics. Drugs is a fantastic example. Legalizing drugs and providing better education doesn't just help the individual concerned, it creates a safer society with regards drug cartels and subsequent drug trafficking.

However as a side note I would branch off to punishing the guilty when it comes to murder.

a reply to: beezzer

Right, and how do we make sure the person takes responsibility? Through proper education of the risks and consequences of unsafe sex, safe sex, and even abstinence. If we want to discourage abortion, there is nothing wrong with saying that abortion = murder. It makes a teenager less likely to pursue it. My point has always been, would you rather punish the teenage girl for GETTING the abortion or do you want to reduce the rate of them occurring? Answering, "well they should just have personal responsibility" is a cop out, because it doesn't solve the problem. It's just you admitting that you don't want to think up any actual solution and have opted for the path of least resistance that absolves you of any guilt.

Though I'd prefer it if we framed the argument outside of abortion...

a reply to: angryhulk

Well again, I would want to actually see REAL studies saying that legal murder reduces the murder rate. It's not something I'd want to just try, just because or anything.

Though, keep in mind, how many murders are driven by mental illness? If we worked harder on treating various mental illnesses, I wonder how the murder rate would look then.

a reply to: Krazysh0t,

Hope you are well today OP.

Can I just give one criticism of your thread. May be you do not wish to have expressed it so, but using abortion as an example in conjunction with murder is not legally sound. Abortion is not murder. It is a legal right of women. Some people may personally view it as murder, but it is not legally defined so.

I have often wondered why we resort to punishment and causing deliberate suffering to people who break the law. It has no advantage for the victim, especially if they are deceased, other than satisfying the desire for revenge. Personally I see revenge as a negative emotion that achieves nothing, "An eye for an eye will make us all blind", kind of reasoning. It appears that punishment and suffering exists mainly as a deterrent. I'm not sure how much it really deters as even with the death penalty murder in those states that use it still happens, probably nearly as much as in states where there is no death penalty. It would be interesting to have statistics available to compare states that are similar in population size, ethnicity, status and all.

I would by far wish it that all these crimes that make victims of us, that hurt people, could be reduced somehow and prevented.

All the very best OP.

originally posted by: Revolution9
a reply to: Krazysh0t,

Hope you are well today OP.

Can I just give one criticism of your thread. May be you do not wish to have expressed it so, but using abortion as an example in conjunction with murder is not legally sound. Abortion is not murder. It is a legal right of women. Some people may personally view it as murder, but it is not legally defined so.

I don't consider it such either, but I'm trying to extend an olive branch here to both sides of the argument and consider things from all angles.

I have often wondered why we resort to punishment and causing deliberate suffering to people who break the law. It has no advantage for the victim, especially if they are deceased, other than satisfying the desire for revenge. Personally I see revenge as a negative emotion that achieves nothing, "An eye for an eye will make us all blind", kind of reasoning. It appears that punishment and suffering exists mainly as a deterrent. I'm not sure how much it really deters as even with the death penalty murder in those states that use it still happens, probably nearly as much as in states where there is no death penalty. It would be interesting to have statistics available to compare states that are similar in population size, ethnicity, status and all.

It should also be noted that it costs more to execute someone than to imprison him for life.

I would by far wish it that all these crimes that make victims of us, that hurt people, could be reduced somehow and prevented.

All the very best OP.

Exactly. There comes a time where you say, "Enough is enough! We have to try something new!" Revenge as a deterrent sounds like uncivilized behavior. For people constantly asking for peace, we should look to ourselves to see how we treat the worst of us.

originally posted by: beezzer
Abortion rates are higher everywhere because people no longer have to face the consequences of their actions.

Getting an abortion is a consequence of an action. If a woman gets pregnant, she most certainly has to face the consequence of her actions. It's her RESPONSIBILITY to decide what to do, so, she DOES take responsibility. Your anti-choice talking points make NO logical sense. There ARE consequences and it's her responsibility to face them.

About the OP, if anti-abortion people REALLY wanted to reduce abortion, seems they'd work toward that, but they don't. They hate contraception and the idea of making it easily available to all. What they REALLY hate is the idea of people having casual sex. Sex is really what they seem to want to control and punish. How many times have we heard, "If she doesn't want to have a baby, then she should keep her legs together", as if 1. she's the only one involved and 2. the only time they have sex is when they want a baby. Neither of which is true.

So, to answer the question in the OP, if we ALL worked together to make contraception freely available to anyone who wanted it, the abortion rate would PLUMMET! That's what I would prefer. Not "punishing" women who have sex, by legally forcing them to have a baby.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Well that's what I was going to touch on. The problem with a lot of cases is;
- the suspect being mentally challenged and/or actively pursuing the cause
- drug related (thinking Mexico out loud)
- gang related (turf wars, revenge)
- religious beliefs/terrorism

I guess there is something we as a society could to do reduce all those aspects, primarily education, but as for 'legal murder reduces murder rate' unfortunately the above list (and more examples) would remain unaffected without direct intervention.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I knew you did not mean it as such. I just gave you the opportunity to clarify. I always like your threads, very well reasoned.

originally posted by: Revolution9
a reply to: Krazysh0t,

Hope you are well today OP.

Can I just give one criticism of your thread. May be you do not wish to have expressed it so, but using abortion as an example in conjunction with murder is not legally sound. Abortion is not murder. It is a legal right of women. Some people may personally view it as murder, but it is not legally defined so.

I have often wondered why we resort to punishment and causing deliberate suffering to people who break the law. It has no advantage for the victim, especially if they are deceased, other than satisfying the desire for revenge. Personally I see revenge as a negative emotion that achieves nothing, "An eye for an eye will make us all blind", kind of reasoning. It appears that punishment and suffering exists mainly as a deterrent. I'm not sure how much it really deters as even with the death penalty murder in those states that use it still happens, probably nearly as much as in states where there is no death penalty. It would be interesting to have statistics available to compare states that are similar in population size, ethnicity, status and all.

I would by far wish it that all these crimes that make victims of us, that hurt people, could be reduced somehow and prevented.

All the very best OP.

Ah I love the "legal" argument. It used to be legal to own slaves in the USA. Yet now we are trying to demonize people who owned slaves back then, even though it was LEGAL at the time. Let's even ban a flag that was flown by an area of the USA that was known for slave owning, even though it was LEGAL. Now the same argument is being made for abortions. It's okay because it's LEGAL.

Someday in the future we'll look back at abortions the same as we do slavery. God, what were people thinking then?!?!

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Had to laugh at your two prying approach because it's well not wrong really.

Less laws equals less crime. And trying to legislate morality doesn't work instead had the opisit effect so it's much better to deal with the issue. But also a society has to function so seems like a catch 22.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

One of the responses I saw was, "what if it can be shown that making murder legal would reduce the rate of murder, would you legalize it?"

Actually I was making fun of how quick you are to accept the number of illegal abortions performed (according to the W.H.O.) as fact.

And besides murder, I also mentioned discrimination, but I doubt you'll touch that one with a 10 ft. pole.

a reply to: angryhulk

True enough. We are going to have to make MANY baby steps in other areas regarding acting more peaceful to one another before we could tackle the legal murder issue. So it's not like I'd be willing to legalize murder tomorrow even IF a study could be produced for it.

a reply to: dragonridr

Well, why can't society function by reducing the problems through proper education versus punishing the guilty? We've been trying the "punish the guilty" approach for thousands of years and where has it gotten us? So I wouldn't be so quick to laugh away my suggestion.

a reply to: Bone75

Interesting. So anything to add to the thread or did you just come in to explain how you were really just insulting me?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: beezzer

Right, and how do we make sure the person takes responsibility? Through proper education of the risks and consequences of unsafe sex, safe sex, and even abstinence. If we want to discourage abortion, there is nothing wrong with saying that abortion = murder. It makes a teenager less likely to pursue it. My point has always been, would you rather punish the teenage girl for GETTING the abortion or do you want to reduce the rate of them occurring? Answering, "well they should just have personal responsibility" is a cop out, because it doesn't solve the problem. It's just you admitting that you don't want to think up any actual solution and have opted for the path of least resistance that absolves you of any guilt.

Though I'd prefer it if we framed the argument outside of abortion...

You're the one who brought up abortion.

Of course education and teaching would be the preferable choice.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Well see you are getting the idea of the point of my thread. I'm trying to get people to look at their arguments to see if they are being sincere about their words or are just using the argument to hide a desire to suppress other people. Abortion wasn't a topic that I wanted to solely focus on here, but it IS one of the better examples to drive my point home.