It really depends on the use case. In general, in the commercial world, we want to be able to have transactions/contracts that can't just be voided without consequence because one of the parties thought it was a good deal at the time but it turned out not to be. On the other hand, most legal systems aren't going to enforce contracts that have ruinous effects on someone because of a simple mistake or event that no one could have foreseen.

Unless you want your transactions to be unstoppable, that is..

What if I don't want my transactions to be stopped?

Sure, the powers of the world that want to engage in financial censorship probably don't think of unstoppable transactions as benefit.

But the people that oppose censorship certainly do think of it as a benefit.

The continuing existence of Bitcoin disproves this. What do you base your point on?