Summary

President Joe Biden commuted the sentences of 37 federal death row inmates to life without parole, sparing all but three convicted of high-profile mass killings.

Biden framed the decision as a moral stance against federal executions, citing his legal background and belief in the dignity of human life.

Donald Trump criticized the move as senseless, vowing to reinstate the death penalty.

Reactions were mixed: some victims’ families condemned Biden, while others supported his decision. Human rights groups praised it as a significant step against capital punishment.

  • douglasg14b@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    Why do you need a source for a fundamental part of human nature? subjectivity

    Google/Bing/DDG/Kagi the word…

    • Determinism@kbin.earth
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 days ago

      Because people like to make claims about human nature that simply aren’t generally true. Rather than recognizing the way complex circumstances can shape human feelings and behaviors, I frequently see people break it down into simple platitudes like “humans are lazy, greedy, etc”, rather than recognizing complex realities like the way power erodes empathy.

      • douglasg14b@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        Isn’t that my precise point but more words?

        Humans are complex. Different people will have different values and we’ll have different lines. This is fundamental to the individualistic nature of people.

        Asking for a source on something ingrained in our everyday lives is almost a bad faith statement. That’s like asking for a source on every piece of casual conversation just to shut it down.

        Do you really need a source that tells you that different people have different values and weigh the problems around them differently?

        • Cataphract@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          I think you’re taking some vague statements and trying to proclaim a universal scientific truth out of it.

          “Even the most die-hard anti-death-penalty believer has their limits.”

          I’d love a source for this.

          fundamental part of human nature. Subjective: (Based on a given person’s experience, understanding, and feelings; personal or individual.

          (you mean, like the complete opposite of your statements can also be true?!)

          This is fundamental to the individualistic nature of people. Asking for a source on something ingrained in our everyday lives is almost a bad faith statement

          So we have fundamental, ingrained states that you’ve declared to be unsourceable (scientifically) and is such a part of us that even bringing it up sounds like bad faith. Real “trust me bro, this is how it is” vibes with no clarity or justification.

      • douglasg14b@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        How does it? Subjectivity is defined by the same things that cause a variance in values and differences in weights placed on problems of others.

        Which is exactly what I’m talking about. Humans are complex we all have differing values.