Is the law bringing the best solution or not? for both criminals and victims.
Debate Rounds (3)
== Topic ==
Is the law bringing the best solution or not for both criminals and victims?
== Point of View ==
As Pro I will be arguing that the law is able to bring the best solution for criminals and victims as opposed to other systems of judgment that have existed throughout history.
The law is objective and unbiased, making it superior to a system based on subjective moral opinions. By holding everybody to the same standards, the law promotes equality while avoiding favoritism or inconsistency. By appealing to a panel of jurors, court law involves human emotion and moral code while the law itself stays independent of subjectivity and dependent on evidence.
Law can go wrong when it is fallaciously interpreted, but that does not make law in itself incapable of providing the best solution for criminals and victims. Note also that using the terms "criminal" and "victim" makes clear the argument is about law providing the best solution for those who are guilty and their victims, which eliminates the falsely accused.
== Con's Queries ==
Con's queries deviated substantially from the topic. As such I only find myself obligated to prove the Pro position in regards to the topic, but I will be glad to respond to Con's statements here.
When I first heard the statement from my LAW subject lecturer. It's being said the Justice came the base word of fairness and it also does came from the Good Moral Values that came from This two major Religion that is Christian And Islam. However, regardless the word justice came from the 'court' is about absolute order not by consensus and Moral Values. What is justice anyway? I'm confuse.
How can anyone know where Justice came from? The idea of Justice existed long before Christianity, and Islam is far more recent than Christianity. Older again than both of those religions is Judaism, and long before Judaism polytheistic religions such as Buddhism were teaching what Justice meant to them.
Every religion and every human society/culture has Good Moral Values. Not every religion/society agree on what they are. Some culture's "good" values will directly contradict others'. That is because Good Moral Values are subjective.
According to America's Good Moral Values, 9/11 and the Holocaust were wrong. But according to Osama bin Laden, 9/11 was a Good Moral Act, and according to Hitler, the Holocaust was a Good Moral Act. Osama bin Laden was Muslim and Hitler was Christian, further undermining the idea that Good Moral Values are cemented by religion.
What is Justice anyway? O_o Dunno if I can help you with that one!
Well perhaps everyone has a different definition, sort of like the meaning of life. You'll have to figure out on your own what Justice is to you. For me, Justice is the observance of equality and fairness, which in turn is the observance of every human's basic right. However, cultures everywhere disagree on basic human rights, or that every human right ought be respected in every situation.
It's a pity your law subject teacher is making such confusing statements. I would be confused, too.
acecombat2 forfeited this round.
Apologies. I was unaware you sought a discussion. Thank you for bringing up an interesting topic :)
acecombat2 forfeited this round.
Imagination forfeited this round.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
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.