CreateDebate


Debate Info

42
32
Agree Disagree
Debate Score:74
Arguments:47
Total Votes:88
Ended:06/22/09
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Agree (26)
 
 Disagree (21)

Debate Creator

JakeJ(3255) pic



This debate has ended. You can no longer add arguments or vote in this debate.

Rush Limbaugh Quote

"Compassion is no substitute for justice."

 

 

Don't let the knowledge of who said this affect your opinion. 

Agree

Side Score: 42
Winning Side!
VS.

Disagree

Side Score: 32
4 points

Very true. I have a feeling though that it's not Limbaugh's quote (he probably got it from someone smarter than him).

Compassion is at many times illogical and only hurts justice. Just how people with compassion feel that pedophiles are victims and shouldn't be punished harshly (just look at Vermont, which is constantly letting pedophiles get off with no jail time).

Side: agree
1 point

"Very true. I have a feeling though that it's not Limbaugh's quote (he probably got it from someone smarter than him)."

What makes you think that? Rush Limbaugh is very smart, and he is almost always right.

I'm glad you posted, even if you don't like rush all that much. Notice how this debate isn't that popular. There would probably be more posts if the title of the debate didn't have Rush's name on it. See, most people don't like to agree with people that they don't like.

Side: agree
3 points

Yeah, yeah, he's very smart. But one can certainly be very smart, yet stubbornly wrong, and never know the difference. The same goes for the folks that parrot the man without giving his hydrocodone-fueled ramblings a second thought.

Side: agree
Cerin(203) Disputed
3 points

Who says he's smart? Just because you agree with him on everything does mean he's intelligent. He certainly seems to say a lot of dumb things to me...

Education-wise, he apparently flunked a lot in school:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush_Limbaugh#Education

Side: Disagree
Mahollinder(893) Disputed
1 point

Define justice, because your use of the pedophile example (mind you, a pedophile is simply someone who has an attraction to prepubescant youths, not someone who necessarily has sex with them) implies that you are simply conflating "justice" with "punishment".

Side: Disagree
ThePyg(6756) Disputed
3 points

fine, let me be more specific. if you have sex with a kid, you deserved to be punished harshly.

that would be justice.

Side: agree

i agree. sometimes you just have to bring down the hammer on people. builds character.

Side: agree
1 point

haha that reminds me:

"you know why you boys are diggin holes?, because it's good for ya, it builds character."

-Holes

Side: agree

I feel I must agree with the statement but also include that justice without compassion is tyranny. No one is saying that justice should not be served according to the law but when someone makes a blanket statement like that it reminds me of France in the time of Robespierre when stealing a loaf of bread to feed a starving family was considered thievery (which it was) but no one cared that there were no jobs for people such as those at that time. That is when justice must be tempered with compassion or it becomes tyrannical.

Side: Agreed with caveats
2 points

Great post! You made a really good point.

I saw an episode of Band Of Brothers (It's a show about WWII If you haven't seen it, you need to.) These American soldiers are in Germany and they find this abandoned concentration camp full of starving people. So they go to the nearest town and take a bunch of food from a bakery so that they can feed the people.

That was necessary. But it should never come to that. If food has to be stolen for people to eat. There is a problem. And whatever problem that is, needs to be fixed. Luckily in America we don't usually have those kinds of problems.

Side: agree

"Liberty and justice for all."

The American Pledge of Allegiance chose those words as it's last and most final words. America cannot afford to be compassionate toward those who have committed crimes against it.

Side: agree
2 points

Your right, however, compassion can be a good thing. It just can't get in the way of justice. We can still have compassion for those people and help them but they have to answerer to the law.

Side: agree
0 points

Um...

Sure, it's simple, a cool sound bite, middle America would totally eat it up. It's a great idea in some situations.

But unfortunately life isn't that simple.

ex. Most would agree that the harsh reparations against Germanay after WWI is the main thing that lead to WWII

Are you talking about something specific here? Or just throwing around phrases?

Side: agree
JakeJ(3255) Disputed
1 point

"ex. Most would agree that the harsh reparations against Germanay after WWI is the main thing that lead to WWII"

How does that apply to today? How should that be applied in the U.S. today?

Side: agree
1 point

I agree for the most part.

Like murder, pedophiles, rapists, etc.

I disagree when it comes to drugs for example, because just throwing people in jail is more expensive and doesn't work,

and I gave the example reparations against Germany after WWI.

Like most things, life is never as simple as talking heads would like them to be,

you can't base policy strictly on 10 second sound bites and expect them to work,

so what specifically was he talking about?

Side: agree
JakeJ(3255) Disputed
2 points

"so what specifically was he talking about?"

He was probably speaking in general. When would this qoute not apply?

Side: Disagree
iamdavidh(4871) Disputed
0 points

well, pyg brought up a good point about logic,

but I would say there's times when it's logical to be compassionate.

For example, a 50 year old lady with cancer found with marijuana in her home in a state where medical marijuana is still illegal,

It would be both logical and compassionate for the police to just let it slide.

Side: agree
Mahollinder(893) Disputed
0 points

When would this qoute not apply?

When compassion and justice are the same thing.

Side: agree
1 point

Well, compassion gets in the way of logic. Most drug laws are NOT logical, so they conflict with justice.

has little to do with compassion. As for laws in general, they are not the same as justice, because they often conflict with justice itself.

Laws enacted by Stalin, Pol Pot, and Mao were all out of what they felt was for the greater good, but had nothing to do with logic. They were based off of their sense of compassion (mainly the people's, since drugs and education were keeping the lower class in the slums). If Stalin were to face logic, he would not have been able to get away with what he did. But he got the lower class to support him because they let their emotions get in the way. That was certainly not justice.

Justice, itself, is based more off of common sense. People are left alone and evil is not allowed. that is justice.

on justice, i can go forever though. Like, Socrates and Plato style.

Side: agree
JakeJ(3255) Disputed
2 points

"Well, compassion gets in the way of logic. Most drug laws are NOT logical, so they conflict with justice."

Here's another Rush Limbaugh quote:

"If you commit a crime, you're guilty."

Does that clear it up for you? It's okay to disagree with a law, to do something to change it. Committing a crime is entirely different. Yes it is that simple.

Side: Disagree
1 point

Both are important. Compassion is no substitute for justice just as justice is no substitute for compassion. Courts and prisons rarely accomplish either compassion or justice. I'm no dittohead.

Side: agree
2 points

"The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong." -Gandhi

Those of us who, even slightly, adhere to Catholicism are taught to "forgive and forget".

Although we can seek forgiveness, the best approach (according to the church) is allow God to make any final judgments. Simply turn the cheek.

Side: Disagree
JakeJ(3255) Disputed
2 points

If somebody murdered a family member of mine, I would eventually come to forgive them. But the law would still apply to them.

This isn't about forgiveness. It's about the law. They are both important however.

Side: agree
1 point

And justice is no substitute for melodramatic self-righteous fear-mongering, at least where Rush's ratings are concerned.

And no, his quote amounts to "an eye for an eye". Somewhere someone has to break the cycle, and that break is usually caused by compassion.

Side: Disagree
JakeJ(3255) Disputed
1 point

"his quote amounts to "an eye for an eye". "

How?

"Somewhere someone has to break the cycle, and that break is usually caused by compassion"

Yeah, but is that a good thing? No.

Tell me why you dissagree.

Side: agree
2 points

He did, you just didn't bother to properly refute him. You stated your opinion, but not much else.

And I'd have to argue that 'breaking the cycle' is, in fact, a good thing. I believe the J-man called it "turning the other cheek".

Side: Disagree
RevFred(349) Disputed
1 point

since Cerin had no rebuttle for you. I'd like to try. :D

ok so, slavery. They were all tryin to escape from us superior white people,and we wanted JUSTICE!!! Then we got compassion for them somehow, and now they live with us. With their hippity hop and grills and what not.

Side: Disagree
1 point

I'm probably going to get shot for this... Yeah, too much compassion is terrible, but I mean, think about it. Let say Tom is home with his wife and children, a thief breaks into his house and makes his way towards the children's room. Tom wakes up to the sound of his daughter Sally screaming and goes into a fit of rage over the protection of his family and murders the thief who is fleeing outside, excellently I might add.(There's some pretty nasty bloodstains on the pavement)

Should this guy get the death penalty? I mean, maybe a few years in prison or even just community service hours, but he didn't asked to get robbed. He was just afraid and did the first thing that came to him.

Ha ha, I'm so silly.

But my point is, every case should be treated with a certain dose of compassion and empathy.

Side: Disagree
1 point

We're all the same people from birth brought up in different worlds and different circumstances. I think hatred of criminals comes from a lack of understanding. Of course murder and rape is irreversibly bad, but instead of demonizing these people, because it's obviously a product of their environment, we should instead learn where there hatred or violent lusts come from and reach out to those in need before they commit the crime. Our society comes from cooperation, noone can go it alone, we at least owe it to our neighbors to help solve these problems.

Justice is just revenge. So... what? Are we supposed to respond with punishment instead of eliminating the problem through compassion? Count me out!

Side: Disagree
JakeJ(3255) Disputed
1 point

"I think hatred of criminals comes from a lack of understanding."

Who said anything about hate? This is about justice.

"Of course murder and rape is irreversibly bad, but instead of demonizing these people, because it's obviously a product of their environment,"

Who said anything about "demonizing" people?, once again this is about justice.

If you or a loved one was raped, I'm sure you would have plenty of compassion for them, oh lets not 'demonize' them.

Please.

"we should instead learn where there hatred or violent lusts come from and reach out to those in need before they commit the crime."

Yes we should except for the word "instead". Do you realize you are going against what this country was founded on? Against our founding fathers?

"we at least owe it to our neighbors to help solve these problems."

We owe it to our founding fathers to follow the constitution!

Side: agree
HGrey87(750) Disputed
1 point

Demonization is the other side of the coin of compassion. We should treat people with neither, in public policy.

Do you realize you are going against what this country was founded on? Against our founding fathers?

What? That's a very Rush Limbaugh non sequitur to accuse someone of. I think the Founders attempted to address the root causes of human tendencies with impartiality, and we should approach this in the same way.

We owe it to our founding fathers to follow the constitution!

Forgive my memory, but haven't you argued for extraordinary rendition and "enhanced interrogation techniques?"

Side: Disagree