Could you be criminally liable for murder if you killed a sentient et in cold blood in our society
Debate Rounds (3)
Now let's say ET landed conducting a scientific mission to study life forms on our planet. A human recognizing the alien wishes to pose no threat to him, the human knows they are sentient, and the ET makes no threatening gestures towards him as understood by humans. Now lets assume the ET has something the human wishes to steal and murders the ET in cold blood.
Now let's draw a parallel to animals. Court systems in different time periods have long recognized human life to hold greater value than animal life throughout all time periods and civilizations. In fact, it was only just recently that animal cruelty could attract criminal prosecution. As of right now to be charged with murder you must kill a human being. Since the alien isn't human, the murderer cannot be charged.
I look forward to this debate and I hope it will be interesting.
.Thanks firstly to con for instigating this contest,I'll be happy to argue pro and look forward to the challenge.
1. The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.
As con has already stated that the human,-"murders the ET in cold blood",then I can safely assume that
the only sticking point here is the question of "human" in relation to "murder",and in all other aspects,this qualifies
as a case of murder .
The next thing we should do is look at the term human.
1. A member of the genus Homo and especially of the species H. sapiens.
2. A person: the extraordinary humans who explored Antarctica.
1. Of, relating to, or characteristic of humans: the course of human events; the human race.
2. Having or showing those positive aspects of nature and character regarded as distinguishing humans from other animals:
an act of human kindness.
3. Subject to or indicative of the weaknesses, imperfections, and fragility associated with humans: a mistake that shows
he's only human; human frailty.
4. Having the form of a human.
5. Made up of humans.
I'd think the definition in bold could be argued on.As where dealing with an entity thats discovering planets,that's here on a "scientific mission to study life forms on our planet" that "wishes to pose no threat",A wish that was "recognized" by the human...Are we getting anywhere near human-esque yet?I think it's possible.
Another point I'd like to make is that it's not out of the question we could share the same origins.Even today man could
ascertain that through some form of testing and perhaps find a common link through ancestry. I may expand on that idea in the next round if I find suitable info as I don't have it for now,although It's Along the lines of humans arriving
here via some form of vessel,such as a meteorite .Which at some point,may have split from a larger one,possibly sending the same potential for life in two different directions.
Even if the ET wasn't accepted as human,I still believe at some point,that a being showing
qualities that con alluded toward with his premise,would be offered protection akin to ourselves.Given many humans
would jump out of there skin to hang out with an intelligent ET,thats travelled through space no less,to think all that
potential knowledge thrown away cause some fool shows our hostile side, when the ET "wishes to pose no threat to him"
Doubt humans of the day would be happy with that.The aliens kin might not either but as con made no mention as to whether this is a first contact meeting,or if some form of relationship is established between the two species,one can only speculate on that front.
kengibson2001 forfeited this round.
As con has forfeited, I'll add nothing more.
kengibson2001 forfeited this round.
No debate really with the double forfeit.As theres no point arguing with myself I'll simply say thanks all the same con and have a nice day.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Lordknukle 5 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||7|
Reasons for voting decision: Obvious much?
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.