The flood wasn't just animals escaping their cage, it was a strategic defeat of the most advanced border wall in the world. They overcame incredible odds to break through it into the land that was stolen from them.

Sure. This claim might even be true. And you're right, it's not fair to compare real people, fighting for their lives, to "dogs".

But it doesn't undo what Hamas did to innocent* people, nor does it undo the fact that the Israeli government funded, supported, and propped up Hamas while suppressing the actual Palestinian parties.

*lmao I just said I didn't believe in innocence.

The idea of free will is unfalsifiable. So far, there is no evidence that there is anything causing conscious beyond, physical, chemical interactions. This means, that most likely, humans do not have free will. Every action, every thought, is caused by some chemical, or physical thing, and is ultimately predetermined.

The idea of "guilt" is born out of the idea that humans have free will, and are therefore culpable for "bad" or "immoral" actions. But humans do not have free will. Punishing a "guilty" person, is actually just inflicting suffering on the qualia, or the conscious experience of someone, for circumstances completely out of anyone's control, including themselves.

I believe that all people are innocent. Every act of violence should be evaluated as if it was being done against an innocent person. The only difference between a killer and a saint is that of brain chemistry.

As for Israel specifically, since that is a different question than the nature of innocent, here is my reply:

• Israel funded and supported Hamas to undermine Palestinian authority
• Israel had extensive knowledge on Hamas' capabilities beforehand, but "accidentally" ignored warning signs

I see a few people blaming Hamas for Oct 7th. I disagree. When a dog bites someone, do you blame the dog or the owner?

humans aren't responsible for their actions.

Yes! Humans are indeed, not culpable for their actions because we have no free will.

Now, I won't go into the nuances of laws here, but I do find punishing people for the sake of punishment, or out of some sense of "they deserve it" to be problematic because all humans are innocent.

Wow.

EDIT: Some of the comments on the repost on that site, 400 comments, are great.

Well, that explains it. I always wondered what Socialized Medicine was... now I know...

People used to get married all the time at 15. What ever happened to traditional values?

It seems like this site is very religious, so there is lots of moralizing, claiming that the boy had done a "mortal sign" among other things.

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.

I have no such limits. Death, as a penalty, is always unjust because humans do not have free will. Every action, every thought, has some biological, or neurochemical, or material basis for it's happening. Inflicting any form of punishment or suffering on the qualia, the conscious experience of someone, for the illusion of choice we believe to have, is actually just inflicting suffering on innocent beings, because we have no choice.

Now, that's not too say I'm anti-violence. But I firmly believe that every piece of violence should be evaluated as if it was being done against an innocent person. Things like "guilt" or "they deserve it" should not be taken into the calculation when doing violence at all, only the benefits it has to the rest of society. If you are in the position to levy death as a punishment, I would rather just see them locked up for life.