> forcing them to do everything else is fine, just as long as no one touches the brain.
I have made no such claim. You keep attacking straw men instead of addressing what I'm actually saying.
> Removing a foot ok though?
I have made no such claim.
> What about the death penalty?
I have already pointed out that the natural consequence (i.e., in a state of nature if there is no society) of attacking someone else for no good reason can be death. So imposing death as a penalty for a sufficiently heinous crime seems to me to be justifiable in principle, if you are sure to a moral certainty that the person did the crime.
Where our current system falls down horribly is in that last part: we impose the death penalty when we are not even close to meeting the strict standard of moral certainty that I just stated.