|
Post by Annan on Nov 13, 2009 13:52:25 GMT -5
Just wondering how members here feel about the death penalty.
Do your religious beliefs influence your opinion?
|
|
|
Post by scotswoman on Nov 13, 2009 15:24:46 GMT -5
When I was a potential juror in a murder case, I was asked my opinion on the death penalty. I answered that we are ALL under the penalty of death, the judge, the lawyers, the jury and others present in the court. I don't see death as a penalty, but simply a fact of all our lives. Some might even envy the one being put to death by lethal injection and want euthanasia for themselves or loved ones to end suffering.
|
|
|
Post by dudeler on Nov 13, 2009 15:56:49 GMT -5
I don't like it.
It seems like a failure of imagination. When our prisons are full of people struggling with mental illness and drug addiction, it seems like it's time for our justice system to change strategy.
I'm sure the Old Testament God would approve, but I think the death penalty's time has passed. I'd like to hear some of our Catholic friends weigh in on this question.
|
|
|
Post by emy on Nov 13, 2009 19:33:15 GMT -5
When I was a potential juror in a murder case, I was asked my opinion on the death penalty. I answered that we are ALL under the penalty of death, the judge, the lawyers, the jury and others present in the court. I don't see death as a penalty, but simply a fact of all our lives. Some might even envy the one being put to death by lethal injection and want euthanasia for themselves or loved ones to end suffering. Hi Scotswoman!
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on Nov 26, 2009 23:54:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sharon on Nov 28, 2009 11:06:11 GMT -5
Num 35:16 And if he smite him with an instrument of iron, so that he die, he [is] a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death. Num 35:17 And if he smite him with throwing a stone, wherewith he may die, and he die, he [is] a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death. Num 35:18 Or [if] he smite him with an hand weapon of wood, wherewith he may die, and he die, he [is] a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death. Num 35:19 The revenger of blood himself shall slay the murderer: when he meeteth him, he shall slay him. Num 35:21 Or in enmity smite him with his hand, that he die: he that smote [him] shall surely be put to death; [for] he [is] a murderer: the revenger of blood shall slay the murderer, when he meeteth him. Num 35:30 Whoso killeth any person, the murderer shall be put to death by the mouth of witnesses: but one witness shall not testify against any person [to cause him] to die. Num 35:31 Moreover ye shall take no satisfaction for the life of a murderer, which [is] guilty of death: but he shall be surely put to death.
Noting that has to be more then one witness in the cases of a murderer facing his own death. Something that came to Jesus for He had 2 false witnesses, didn't He?
There were cities of refuge where someone not guilty of intentional murder could flee to and had to live there as long as the ruling chief priest was alive.
|
|
|
Post by Annan on Nov 28, 2009 18:23:39 GMT -5
I don't see death as a penalty, but simply a fact of all our lives. Amen! My father is terribly fearful of death and says it's evil. I don't understand that considering he believes in Jesus and tries to live in accordance with Christian beliefs. He says he lives with the hope that his name will be found in the Book of Life, yet he is terrified that he will be found wanting. Such a sad state of affairs.
|
|
|
Post by Rob O on Nov 28, 2009 21:28:53 GMT -5
Just wondering how members here feel about the death penalty. I'm against it. Yes.
|
|
|
Post by eyedeetentee on Nov 29, 2009 2:49:43 GMT -5
When they are proven guilty and there is not doubt, put 'em out of their misery. It saves jail space for ridiculous sentences like drug trafficking, gang bangers, small-time thieves, etc. But death by prison officials should not cost millions. A bullet is less that three bucks and prisoners can dig the grave.
|
|
shushy
Royal Member
Warning
50%
Posts: 8,009
|
Post by shushy on Nov 29, 2009 6:11:39 GMT -5
I don't see death as a penalty, but simply a fact of all our lives. Amen! My father is terribly fearful of death and says it's evil. I don't understand that considering he believes in Jesus and tries to live in accordance with Christian beliefs. He says he lives with the hope that his name will be found in the Book of Life, yet he is terrified that he will be found wanting. Such a sad state of affairs. Tell your Dad if he believes in Christ his name is already written in the book of life and his sins will be blotted out. It is part of the promise. He needs assurance of salvation and will get that if he reads all the scriptures on salvation.
|
|
|
Post by Annan on Nov 29, 2009 18:29:05 GMT -5
Tell your Dad if he believes in Christ his name is already written in the book of life and his sins will be blotted out. It is part of the promise. He needs assurance of salvation and will get that if he reads all the scriptures on salvation. Thanks, shushy. That's what I don't understand... either he believes in his God/Jesus or he doesn't. What is there to doubt?
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on Nov 29, 2009 21:04:57 GMT -5
When they are proven guilty and there is not doubt, put 'em out of their misery. It saves jail space for ridiculous sentences like drug trafficking, gang bangers, small-time thieves, etc. But death by prison officials should not cost millions. A bullet is less that three bucks and prisoners can dig the grave. Which leads us to the general problem with the modern system of criminal injustice. It's not just the death penalty. Small-time thieves should not be in jail. They should repay what they stole to the proper owner, with some additional compensation (e.g. repay 2-3x the price). Those who sell drugs are merely selling what is desired to those who will willingly buy it. There may be a vice on both sides of such a transaction, but there is certainly no crime.
|
|
|
Post by Annan on Nov 30, 2009 16:58:23 GMT -5
Small-time thieves should not be in jail. They should repay what they stole to the proper owner, with some additional compensation (e.g. repay 2-3x the price). Those who sell drugs are merely selling what is desired to those who will willingly buy it. There may be a vice on both sides of such a transaction, but there is certainly no crime. Agreed on both accounts. It seems our justice system is more about punishment and less about restitution and remedy. And do people really believe that because we have laws that people won't commit crimes? The 10 C's say do not to kill and steal, yet people still do. How do rules/laws/commandments instill morals and values?
|
|
|
Post by eyedeetentee on Nov 30, 2009 22:59:22 GMT -5
Maybe some people choose to ignore the learned morals and values whether permanently or for special occasions. I can think of a few special occasions that I could temporarily and conveniently forget morals and values.
|
|
shushy
Royal Member
Warning
50%
Posts: 8,009
|
Post by shushy on Dec 1, 2009 6:23:08 GMT -5
Tell your Dad if he believes in Christ his name is already written in the book of life and his sins will be blotted out. It is part of the promise. He needs assurance of salvation and will get that if he reads all the scriptures on salvation. Thanks, shushy. That's what I don't understand... either he believes in his God/Jesus or he doesn't. What is there to doubt? There is nothing to doubt when you believe. After leaving meetings I struggled for some time periodicaly with feeling a drawing to return, My pastor took me through scriptures and when I believed the word of God, Jesus, John 1:1, and how powerful the word is and got that into my head my thinking changed. I felt assured through what script said that I was bornagain. Liberty came and a freedom in my mind from the restrictions and weights that had been put upon me by wrong teaching. The Lord set me free to believe the truth instead of the lies.
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Dec 1, 2009 19:42:10 GMT -5
Those who sell drugs are merely selling what is desired to those who will willingly buy it. There may be a vice on both sides of such a transaction, but there is certainly no crime. That's quite a broad view of "crime", don't you think? 1. Crystal Meth addiction by a mother of young children results in unsatisfactory living conditions for her children. 2. There is a societal responsibility to protect such children, and there are expenses associated with doing so. 3. This places a burden on society that could be decreased if there were no crystal meth addicts 4. Society has the right to criminalize the manufacture, sale, purchase and use of crystal meth to reduce said burden
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on Dec 2, 2009 21:29:11 GMT -5
That's quite a broad view of "crime", don't you think? 1. Crystal Meth addiction by a mother of young children results in unsatisfactory living conditions for her children. 2. There is a societal responsibility to protect such children, and there are expenses associated with doing so. 3. This places a burden on society that could be decreased if there were no crystal meth addicts 4. Society has the right to criminalize the manufacture, sale, purchase and use of crystal meth to reduce said burden Broad? Did you mean "narrow" Indeed, a woman who neglects her children has committed a crime. The crime is not in the use of the crystal meth but in neglecting her lawful obligation to provide for her children. As individuals, we our responsible for our actions. Deciding to put a harmful substance into one's own body is not in and of itself a crime. We should not criminalize non-crimes because they can sometimes or often do lead to actual crimes. We don't need to try to trace the causes of crimes and criminalize the causes. If we recognize crimes for what they are then we can consistently hold individuals accountable for their actions. Punishing people for actions that we judge might influence them to commit crime is not only unjust but counterproductive. If you're interesting in reading a more in-depth (and probably more clearly stated) discussion of the topic, I'd recommend Lysander Spooner's 'Vices Are Not Crimes': www.lysanderspooner.org/VicesAreNotCrimes.htm
|
|
|
Post by rational on Dec 3, 2009 13:01:00 GMT -5
That's quite a broad view of "crime", don't you think? 1. Crystal Meth addiction by a mother of young children results in unsatisfactory living conditions for her children. 2. There is a societal responsibility to protect such children, and there are expenses associated with doing so. 3. This places a burden on society that could be decreased if there were no crystal meth addicts 4. Society has the right to criminalize the manufacture, sale, purchase and use of crystal meth to reduce said burden Broad? Did you mean "narrow" Indeed, a woman who neglects her children has committed a crime. The crime is not in the use of the crystal meth but in neglecting her lawful obligation to provide for her children. As individuals, we our responsible for our actions. Deciding to put a harmful substance into one's own body is not in and of itself a crime. We should not criminalize non-crimes because they can sometimes or often do lead to actual crimes. We don't need to try to trace the causes of crimes and criminalize the causes. If we recognize crimes for what they are then we can consistently hold individuals accountable for their actions. Punishing people for actions that we judge might influence them to commit crime is not only unjust but counterproductive. If you're interesting in reading a more in-depth (and probably more clearly stated) discussion of the topic, I'd recommend Lysander Spooner's 'Vices Are Not Crimes': www.lysanderspooner.org/VicesAreNotCrimes.htmI think the crime is making substances that people want/crave/need illegal and driving the price so high that all of their efforts are required just to purchase what they need instead of making it legal for 1/100 or 1/1000 of the price and trying to help the person control their addiction. The war on drugs is costing us dollars and lives and it cannot be won.
|
|
|
Post by MsMarie on Apr 21, 2010 4:57:30 GMT -5
I am against the death penalty for a very simple reason. In my lifetime an innocent man was hanged. His name was Timothy Evans and it was the Christie killings. The real murderer confessed afterwards. There is more than a chance that James Hanratty, (the A6 killings) was innocent (hanged on an identification which is now suspect). Derek Bentley was 19 years old, mentally not the full shilling and only may have encouraged another to shoot a policeman. 'Let him have it' were the words which hanged him, which could also mean 'Give him the gun' but 16 year old Christopher Craig, the shooter, being underage was just imprisoned and Derek was hanged even though he didn't handle or fire the weapon. Ruth Ellis, the last woman to hang here in UK was brutally treated by her boyfriend, was deliberately wound up and given a gun by someone else who also wanted him dead. She would not get the same verdict today.
None of the above can be brought back to life. If these people are just in my own lifetime, then how many others? The only sure way is to have no death penalty and I for one was glad to see it go.
|
|
|
Post by MsMarie on Apr 21, 2010 4:59:13 GMT -5
PS Vengeance is mine said the Lord, I will repay.....
|
|
|
Post by someguy on Apr 21, 2010 10:33:48 GMT -5
I am against against the death penalty.
Yes my spiritual/religious beliefs influence my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Sylvestra on Jul 20, 2010 18:40:25 GMT -5
Just wondering how members here feel about the death penalty. I'm against it. Yes. Rob, it would be interesting to know how your beliefs have influenced (changed?) your opinioin. Can you expand on this? E
|
|
|
Post by Sylvestra on Jul 20, 2010 18:44:45 GMT -5
I am against against the death penalty. Yes my spiritual/religious beliefs influence my opinion. Also, someguy, can you expand on the religious beliefs that have influenced (changed?) your opinion. The death penalty is something I'm still wrestling with E
|
|
|
Post by Rob O on Jul 20, 2010 20:03:07 GMT -5
Hi Edy,
It's not something I have spent much time thinking about - my view on this is more intuitively formed. To follow Jesus is to follow the path of love, mercy, compassion, reconciliation and restoration. I leave judgement in the hands of God. How can I profess to love all and want the best for all but support state sanctioned killing, no matter how horrendous the crime? I can't..... I've spent too much time with St Francis, Jean Vanier, Gandhi, Dave Andrews and Jesus.
|
|
|
Post by eyedeetentee on Jul 20, 2010 20:09:03 GMT -5
Some people just simply need to be dead - court or no court.
|
|
|
Post by Sylvestra on Jul 20, 2010 21:42:05 GMT -5
Hi Edy, It's not something I have spent much time thinking about - my view on this is more intuitively formed. To follow Jesus is to follow the path of love, mercy, compassion, reconciliation and restoration. I leave judgement in the hands of God. How can I profess to love all and want the best for all but support state sanctioned killing, no matter how horrendous the crime? I can't..... I've spent too much time with St Francis, Jean Vanier, Gandhi, Dave Andrews and Jesus. What would you suggest doing with a murderer, rapist, etc. instead of death? Incarcerate them for life without the possiblity of parole, and charge all of society for the keep? Is that equitable to the crime? Why do you think God called for the death penalty in the OT? And why would it be changed? 'Sorry for all the questions, but this is what goes on in my mind Thanx! E
|
|
|
Post by someguy on Jul 20, 2010 23:40:59 GMT -5
I am against against the death penalty. Yes my spiritual/religious beliefs influence my opinion. Also, someguy, can you expand on the religious beliefs that have influenced (changed?) your opinion. The death penalty is something I'm still wrestling with E I suppose I wonder how state sponsored murder is better than murder that isn't state sponsored. As much evil as some people commit here on earth, I still think that as one who loves and follows Christ I could never accept the death penalty. I suppose I feel it a tad bit self righteous to think that if sin is sin, somehow my sin is lesser and allows me to judge another man and say he deserves to die. The one I profess to follow is gracious, loving, merciful to the very ones who would be responsible for His death, how could I profess to love this man, say I am a follower and then in the next breath condemn another to die?
|
|
|
Post by Rob O on Jul 20, 2010 23:56:29 GMT -5
What would you suggest doing with a murderer, rapist, etc. instead of death? Incarcerate them for life without the possiblity of parole, and charge all of society for the keep? Is that equitable to the crime? We are humans. Our knowledge is always incomplete. We are hopelessly inadequate for the task of determining what is equitable to the crime. But where there is life, there is always hope of restoration and reconciliation. Killing someone legally is still killing someone and removes any possibility of their finding healing in this lifetime. Not to mention the terrible reality of innocent people on death row. Didn't Jesus show us that man was involved in OT laws? "Moses allowed...but I say to you..." As I said, for me, to follow Jesus is to follow the path of love, mercy, compassion, reconciliation and restoration. I leave judgement in the hands of God. How can I profess to love all and want the best for all but support state sanctioned killing, no matter how horrendous the crime? Ps. BTW, hope you are doing well.
|
|