The death penalty is not a deterrent,it is murder. Do you agree?

Yes.Death penalty is not a deterrent, it is murder.

First things first- no human being is God.In other words,no human being has the right to take away a life. Then of course people argue that in cases of murder, the guilty has already taken a life. But what we have to realise is that in almost all cases-even if the guilty person was supossedly in his senses during the murder-he is mentally unstable.This can either be seen in the medical point of view or what i call the "human-being" point of view.Which human being will want to kill another?More often than not, something in the person snaps before he does such an act.So will killing this person really help?

The death penatly is in many ways inhumane.We always hear people talk about how cruel olden day methods of killlings were , but think of it-is the electric chair,death by hanging or the most "human" lethal injection any better? We have all heard about cases that have gone wrong and then only do we realise how inhuman this whole thing is.So rather than killing the guilty, would it not be better to give him treatment or counsilling instead? The government-especially in Singapore- always stress on giving ple a second chance-we see posters encouraging people to employ ex-drug additcs because they too are human and deserve a second chance at life.Then why should these 'murderes' be any different? Another thing goverments should invest on rather than the huge electicity bills thanks to the electirc chair would be the study of the brain of a murderer. Maybe after all the studies, they can actually help to prevent people from becoming like this. Then there would no longer be the need for such a debate.

Another thing that is extremely unfair is when the death penalty is given to a perdon who is caught posessing drugs. Many a time, people turn to drug trafficking due to their extreme poverty-how then can the state be so 'heartless'?

There is no doubt that the death penalty is an excellent way to warn people not do carry out such acts and is also a way for the victim's family to feel satisfied as their 'revenge' has been taken with the murderer's death.But I still feel that the death penalty is not the way to go which is probably why if i ruled the world, there will be no such thing as the death penalty.

merits and demerits of censorship

Censorship is is everywhere-in movies,in advertisments, on the radio and even on the inetrnet(thanks to parental blocks). But is censorship really necessary?

Censorship is a way for the government to "protect" its people.If there were to be no censors on television or the internet, then people will be free to view everything-including drugs,sex,violence,vulgarities- the list is endless. Sure, this might not seem like such a big deal to adults or tennagers even,but imagine a young child exposed to such things.The consequences could be more harmful then we think.What if that young boy,exposed to movies on gruesome murders grows up to be a murderer, or a sex addict if he is free to watch t.v.soaps full of sex?Tender minds learn from watching.If they see things like sex and violence everywhere around them when growing up, when they too will grow up to think that this is all alright.

Also, if people were free to acess any media, then their values could be tarnished.For many cultures, sex is a sacred thing which is why in countries like India, any movie with even a kissing scene becomes an NC-16 movie.Not just that, media without censorship could also be offensive to people in terms of religion or race.For example,the movie Borat was banned in Kazakstan as it was a huge offense to the people of that country. If such a censorship act was not carried out there, then many people of that country might have started riots on watching it.

However, it is a fact that we, as human beings, deserve our freedom and therefore, deserve to know the truth.Not only that, if there was free media, then the early exposure to young children might actually be a form of education. In other words, if childrean were to grow up in a world where everything is blocked or censored for them, then their curiosity might lead them into even deeper waters than if they were simply exposed to the world from the start.

This debate is the very reason why it is so difficult for any authority to pipn point what should be censored and what should not. Once again, this is a debate that might never come to an end.