The Scales wrote:
Trial by TV wrote: I'd like to find out if they are actually guilty before I pass judgement.
Ordinarily I'd agree, but in this case the bombers established guilt by virtue of their actions since being identified as suspects.
This actually gets a little interesting in one sense depending on their beliefs.
Obviously, most of us here feel that what they did was a horrific, vile act. Depending on their beliefs though, it's possible that what they did was, in their own minds, very moral and righteous.
Now, read everything before you attack one line of mine, in their minds, we are punishing them and sentencing them for something they did that was virtuous. It brings up some interesting morality questions. Imagine you were visiting some other lands, and when there you returned what looked like a lost piece of jewelry to the owner, and were punished with the removal of your hand because you committed a very immoral, disgusting act. Naturally, you would be pretty horrified and confused. Another well known example would be Jesus, who the crowd basically wanted killed for preaching false beliefs (which he believed to be divine and true).
The point here is that morality/justice/etc. are not really as black and white as people tend to view them, and people should at least pause and consider these situation fully.
Where I draw the line is in how I judge them as people. Depending on their beliefs (which we may never know) I don't necessarily consider them evil people, though they did commit a very cruel, very horrific act.
All that said, I do think they are 100% deserving of punishment to the fullest extent of the law. They both lived in America, understood how the law worked, knew that what they were doing was considered wrong and evil by Western morality, and still went ahead and did it.