The Death Penalty

• majorspark

  

  I Wear Pants;506581 wrote:That person is probably pretty fucked in the head. (Much like you'd have to be for late term abortions).

  So a soldier that volunteers to take life in the name of a just government is fucked in the head? What is the difference? Is no government taking of life ever just? Are you saying that government sanctioned killing in war can never be justified? Killing in war is justified by the government. Mass killing I might add. And yes some killing of the innocent. So tell me what is the difference between those individuals the government judges their live to be taken in a just war and the government justly taking a life through its civilian code of justice?
  

  I Wear Pants;506581 wrote:I find it interesting that there is a pretty large correlation between people thinking that abortion is murder and people thinking the death penalty is the best thing since sliced bread. Sanctity of life my ass.

  No one thinks death is the best thing since slice bread. An innocent life snuffed out in the womb. A life that is given no hearing before a court of law. How can you compare it to the taking of life of a heinous killer judged by a jury of his peers? How can you compare the taking of life in the womb to the likes of this man. John Couey. Took the life of a 9yr old girl. Raped her and buried her alive. Just and reasonable people can rightfully condemn this man to death. The evidence was overwhelming. Because of our warped justice system he died a natural death. Sadly their are many more like him.
  
  Please don't compare the killing of innocent babies to the likes of him or his ilk anymore.
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Couey
• jmog

  ernest_t_bass;502278 wrote:The way I see it, Belly... who are we to pass judgement (death) to these people, if we consider ourselves to be true believers of Christ (IF we are... which I claim to be). When I look at it that way, I cannot see how I may pass that sort of judgement on someone. We are all FREE living beings, free to do as we please. What we want, where we want, how we want. If we want to rape, we rape. If we want to kill, we kill. We are free to do whatever we want. However, there should be consequences to our actions that harm others, as agreed upon by our peers. I think the maximum of those consequences should be life in prison.
  
  I just don't see how it is my right to say that you DESERVE to die. That is God's decision, not mine.

  
  By that logic you could stretch it to say "I just don't see how it is my right to say you deserve to be put in prison for life, that is God's decision whether to punish or not".
  
  I think our legal system has this one "right". For the most heinous crimes death is definitely a needed option/deterrant, but the accused has every right to go through a littany of appeals before the sentence is carried out.
• jmog

  I Wear Pants;502331 wrote:It costs millions of dollars more for the death penalty vs a life sentence.

  
  I'm not saying you are wrong as I don't know, but I'd love to see a link on this as its hard to believe.
• FatHobbit

  

  jmog;506917 wrote:I'm not saying you are wrong as I don't know, but I'd love to see a link on this as its hard to believe.

  
  I don't have a link, but the difference in cost is due to the appeals that someone gets before they are put to death.
• jmog

  BoatShoes;502463 wrote:I tend to think the death penalty in its current form is inadequate on both consequentialist/deterrant grounds as well as retributativist grounds. I mean suppose you fly a plain into a building and kill 3,000 people, many of whom die horribly graphic deaths....it doesn't seem as if a nearly painless death via lethal injection is a proper retribution in my eyes. You might say that the max penalty you can give someone is death, but what about the pain and suffering that the people endured in addition to their death?
  
  I tend to think some kind of torture would satisfy deterrence and retribution, the underlying competing goals of punishment, much more than death by lethal injection. JMO.

  
  Wow Boatshoes, you are typically on the "left" side of things, never would have figured you for the torture type.
  
  As "right wing" as I am I can't agree with this. I mean my emotions would say "yeah, torture the bastard" if it was someone close to me, but my head says that torture is wrong.
• jmog

  I Wear Pants;506581 wrote:That person is probably pretty fucked in the head. (Much like you'd have to be for late term abortions).
  
  I find it interesting that there is a pretty large correlation between people thinking that abortion is murder and people thinking the death penalty is the best thing since sliced bread. Sanctity of life my ass.

  
  
  
  Difference is the baby is innocent, the perpetrator is not.
  
  
  Its not a double standard or hypocracy by anymeans.
• jmog

  FatHobbit;506927 wrote:I don't have a link, but the difference in cost is due to the appeals that someone gets before they are put to death.

  
  Someone with a life sentence has the same opportunity for appeals.
• Thread Bomber

  

  If you are TRULEY Christian..... You would put them in prison for life and let Jesus sort it out.
• CenterBHSFan

  

  Thread Bomber;506977 wrote:If you are TRULEY Christian..... You would put them in prison for life and let Jesus sort it out.

  How do you figure that? Jesus wanted people to follow the law and abide by it.
• FatHobbit

  

  CenterBHSFan;506982 wrote:How do you figure that? Jesus wanted people to follow the law and abide by it.

  
  Do you really believe Jesus would have been for the death penalty?
• BoatShoes

  FatHobbit;506999 wrote:Do you really believe Jesus would have been for the death penalty?

  
  He' created a world wherein billions of people suffer unimaginably horrible lives and deaths because one guy ate a piece of fruit he shouldn't have (knowing full well that he would eat the fruit) and a permanent torture chamber wherein people who don't proclaim him as their savior rot for all eternity....I think he'd be ok with putting people to death in a manner similar to knocking people out with an anesthetic.
• FatHobbit

  

  BoatShoes;507014 wrote:He' created a world wherein billions of people suffer unimaginably horrible lives and deaths because one guy ate a piece of fruit he shouldn't have (knowing full well that he would eat the fruit) and a permanent torture chamber wherein people who don't proclaim him as their savior rot for all eternity....I think he'd be ok with putting people to death in a manner similar to knocking people out with an anesthetic.

  
  Jesus was all about second chances IMHO.
• jmog

  Thread Bomber;506977 wrote:If you are TRULEY Christian..... You would put them in prison for life and let Jesus sort it out.

  
  False, go read the Bible and come back to us .
• jmog

  FatHobbit;506999 wrote:Do you really believe Jesus would have been for the death penalty?

  
  To be honest, I don't know.
  
  On one hand Jesus said to abide by the laws of the land, so if the land (US) deems it ok to have the death penalty as a "deterrant" then we are to abide by it and follow it as Christians.
  
  However, on the other hand, Jesus was also one of "turning the other cheek", "those without sin cast the first stone", etc as you say.
  
  So, if Jesus was the leader of a government I would say he probably wouldn't have the death penalty, but if he were a citizen he would go along with it as part of the laws.
• jhay78

  

  Thread Bomber;506977 wrote:If you are TRULEY Christian..... You would put them in prison for life and let Jesus sort it out.

  FatHobbit;506999 wrote:Do you really believe Jesus would have been for the death penalty?

  jmog;507083 wrote:To be honest, I don't know.
  
  On one hand Jesus said to abide by the laws of the land, so if the land (US) deems it ok to have the death penalty as a "deterrant" then we are to abide by it and follow it as Christians.
  
  However, on the other hand, Jesus was also one of "turning the other cheek", "those without sin cast the first stone", etc as you say.
  
  So, if Jesus was the leader of a government I would say he probably wouldn't have the death penalty, but if he were a citizen he would go along with it as part of the laws.

  
  I'm guessing he would be for it- as the punishment for the premeditated taking of human life.
  
  From Romans 13:8:
  

  for it (the governmental authorities) is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath upon the one who practices evil

  I don't believe in the death penalty (or any form of punishment) as a deterrant; it is simply justice. The intentional taking of innocent human life (not accidental/ manslaughter; or waging a just war) requires the death penalty as the only just punishment.
  
  Now, from Jesus' perspective and "those without sin cast the first stone"- there is still room for the offender to be forgiven by God while still facing the legal consequences of the death penalty.
• I Wear Pants

  jmog;506943 wrote:Difference is the baby is innocent, the perpetrator is not.
  
  
  Its not a double standard or hypocracy by anymeans.

  Didn't say double standard or hypocrisy. I really just found/find it interesting. Which is what I said.
  
  As for soldiers volunteering to take the lives of others as majorspark brought up. I don't think that's the same thing.
  
  " Just and reasonable people can rightfully condemn this man to death.". I can't. I can say that he's done sufficient wrongs to earn him a nice stay in a concrete and steel hotel for the rest of his days but I cannot say that killing him is the correct thing to do.
• I Wear Pants

  jmog;506917 wrote:I'm not saying you are wrong as I don't know, but I'd love to see a link on this as its hard to believe.

  http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty
• Thread Bomber

  

  CenterBHSFan;506982 wrote:How do you figure that? Jesus wanted people to follow the law and abide by it.

  Wasn't it Jesus that said :if someone put it in your butt... Offer them your mouth..... Maybe it was other cheek...
  
  I'm just a little rusty on the man in the sky thing....
• CenterBHSFan

  

  Thread Bomber;507222 wrote:Wasn't it Jesus that said :if someone put it in your butt... Offer them your mouth..... Maybe it was other cheek...
  
  I'm just a little rusty on the man in the sky thing....

  
  Not sure if you are trying to insult me, or insult what I believe in?
  Not funny either way. And, I don't go around and insult those who do not believe, I would like to have the same courtesy.
  Thanks!
• Thread Bomber

  

  Not trying to insult you...... Believe me, I could do much better. Surely you see the irony of interpretation of the bible. It's like the lost and found,,,, People take what they want from it. No saying that it's good or bad.... Just ironic.
• jhay78

  

  FatHobbit;506999 wrote:Do you really believe Jesus would have been for the death penalty?

  jmog;507083 wrote:To be honest, I don't know.
  
  On one hand Jesus said to abide by the laws of the land, so if the land (US) deems it ok to have the death penalty as a "deterrant" then we are to abide by it and follow it as Christians.
  
  However, on the other hand, Jesus was also one of "turning the other cheek", "those without sin cast the first stone", etc as you say.
  
  So, if Jesus was the leader of a government I would say he probably wouldn't have the death penalty, but if he were a citizen he would go along with it as part of the laws.

  
  Just to add to that thought- in Luke's gospel account of Jesus on the cross, he records the conversation between the other two criminals being crucified. One mocked Jesus and dared him to save all three of them, if he was really the Son of God. The other said something quite different:
  

  But the other answered, and rebuking him said, "Do you not even fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? And we indeed are suffering justly, for we are receiving what we deserve for our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong."

  Luke 23:40-41
  
  Jesus responded by saying, "Truly I say to you, today you shall be with me in paradise." I have a feeling that Jesus agreed that they were receiving their just punishment as criminals.
• BoatShoes

  jhay78;507469 wrote: I have a feeling that Jesus agreed that they were receiving their just punishment as criminals.

  
  If that's true...he's a agreeing with an inhumane and gruesome practice...crucifixion...very different from lethal injection.
• jhay78

  

  BoatShoes;507656 wrote:If that's true...he's a agreeing with an inhumane and gruesome practice...crucifixion...very different from lethal injection.

  
  OK- maybe not the method of execution, but the sentence of the death penalty.
• I Wear Pants

  I really doubt that Jesus would have been a supporter of the death penalty. I mean, large parts of the Bible and Jesus' teaching is about how judging others isn't something we should really be doing. Then there is the whole "You shall not kill." thing. I don't recall there being a "except if he did something bad" after that.
• jmog

  I Wear Pants;508091 wrote:I really doubt that Jesus would have been a supporter of the death penalty. I mean, large parts of the Bible and Jesus' teaching is about how judging others isn't something we should really be doing. Then there is the whole "You shall not kill." thing. I don't recall there being a "except if he did something bad" after that.

  
  1. I have already stated I'm not sure what Jesus would have said about the death penalty.
  2. Jesus' talks on judging others is about personal judging as in treating someone different or disowning them because you don't agree with what they are doing wrong. He never condemns lawful judging (as in judgements by the law of the land).
  3. The Hebrew word for "kill" in the 10 commandments is more accurately translated as murder in most modern translations of the Bible, or kill without cause.