Abortion nay Capital Punishmant Yay? Hypocrasy

[rlg94086]

Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity “are very rare, if not practically non-existent.”

I agree with you Texas Roofer. However, the arguments regarding escapees and prisoners killing others in prison are valid, as well. Both do happen, so we haven’t really rendered anyone “incapable of doing harm.” Even if we executed an in-prison murderer after-the-fact, another life would have been taken. And, no prison is “escape-proof.”

 

[blessedtoo]

Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity “are very rare, if not practically non-existent.”

With respect to our beloved JPII, I think we can agree he was not a criminal lawyer or prosecutor in the US. We can also agree that his statements allow latitude for the state to make such determinations. As well, Catholics are free to form their consciences on this matter while taking our Pope’s wisdom into consideration.

The poster says we do imprison the offender for decades. And then sometimes execute the offender after the imprisonment.

Let’s be clear. Those who have been condemned to the death are not executed immediately. They are provided ample opportunity to present a case for commuting their sentences. This means they are often in prison, on death row, for many years while lawyers tie up the courts with appeal after appeal. Obviously, a convicted criminal on death row hoping to have his sentence overturned is going to remain on his best behavior. However, the state has already concluded, by this time, that such a person is no longer able to remain in society. Would it be your suggestion that the state wait until this offender kills again, perhaps an innocent prison guard or, through underground channels, a hit on someone outside the prison? If the state has determined that such a thing is even possible, they have the responsibility to insure the safety of all before such a thing happens.

How is the older man sitting in prison for the 16th year an imminent danger, and to whom does he pose this danger?

Who is this “older man” you keep referring to?
As I stated above, a death row prisoner who is waiting for his lawyers to find a loophole to get his sentence commuted is probably going to exercise restraint and avoid trouble.

A better example of the need for Capital punishment would be:

Officer Susan Canfield, 59, a seven-year veteran who was helping supervise a field crew when the escape occurred, died from injuries she received when the escapees rammed her horse and ran her over as they fled the Wynne Unit crop fields in a stolen truck, prison officials said.
She became the 40th Texas correctional officer to die in the line of duty since May 1882, when a guard was struck by a train.
Martin and John Ray Falk Jr., 40, who was serving a life sentence for murder from Matagorda County, were being held without bail late Monday on pending charges ranging from murder to kidnapping to escape.

statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/09/25/0925guard.html

 

[Texas_Roofer]

…

A better example of the need for Capital punishment would be:
[inserted quote]
Officer Susan Canfield, 59, a seven-year veteran who was helping supervise a field crew when the escape occurred, died from injuries she received when the escapees rammed her horse and ran her over as they fled the Wynne Unit crop fields in a stolen truck, prison officials said.
She became the 40th Texas correctional officer to die in the line of duty since May 1882, when a guard was struck by a train.
Martin and John Ray Falk Jr., 40, who was serving a life sentence for murder from Matagorda County, were being held without bail late Monday on pending charges ranging from murder to kidnapping to escape.
statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/09/25/0925guard.html

Wow only 40 deaths in 125 years. That would certainly hurt the arguement concerning capital punishment for the guards safety. Maybe the Church knows what it is doing?

 

[Ray_Scheel]

With respect to our beloved JPII, I think we can agree he was not a criminal lawyer or prosecutor in the US. We can also agree that his statements allow latitude for the state to make such determinations. As well, Catholics are free to form their consciences on this matter while taking our Pope’s wisdom into consideration.
…
A better example of the need for Capital punishment would be:
statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/09/25/0925guard.html

Well said. That dangers to guards and the general public (as there was a hostage taken briefly during the escape described above, and then the many assaults and death of a police officer a the hands of the Texas 7 just a few years back) are still clearly evident in broad swaths of the US years after JP II made his statement is a clear sign that this is not one of the places that has the facilities to carry out “rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm”, thus dramatically limiting the applicability of the rest of the guidance he provided regarding places that do have that capability.

 

[adrift]

Wow only 40 deaths in 125 years. That would certainly hurt the arguement concerning capital punishment for the guards safety. Maybe the Church knows what it is doing?

Does it? It seems to reinforce the argument that it does protect guards.

 

[YADA]

From this response to the 48 Pro-Choice politicians by then Archbishop Levada found here
http://www.usccb.org/bishops/reflections.shtml
**

**In the letter the Members of Congress raise their concerns about being singled out for their stance on abortion, their “pro-choice” position, while their support for many other aspects of the social teaching of the Church places them on the side of “pro-life” concerns in a variety of ways: “If Catholic legislators are scorned and held out for ridicule by Church leaders on the basis of a single issue, the Church will lose strong advocates on a wide range of issues that relate to the core of important Catholic social teaching.”

It is important to clarify this important point. On the one hand one finds people who develop “scorecards” of Catholic teaching, on which a “pro-choice” politician who supports many important aspects of Catholic social teaching, but is pro-abortion, will get a “high” mark of 80% or 90% support for Catholic teaching. At the same time, a “prolife” politician who is also pro-death penalty, pro-Iraq war, etc., will be ranked “low” on a “support for Catholic teaching” index. The implication here is that all Catholic teaching has the same “rank” in terms of its obligation upon the Catholic conscience**.
**
It is true that the accusation of “single issue” politics is intended to marginalize the accused from the political mainstream of American life, where there are so many important issues of concern to the creation and maintenance of a just and beneficent society. Since the concern is raised about Catholics [and especially bishops] falling into the “single issue” trap, it might be useful to recognize the reality of our political choices. While most of us are concerned about a fairly broad range of issues, we tend to become particularly energetic about a few: environment, housing, health care, war and peace, abortion.

Parenthetically, since the letter was signed by 48 Democratic members of Congress, it may not be out of place here to recall a recent example of “single issue” politics offered by the Democratic presidential campaign. In the press reports about a rumored invitation to Republican Sen. John McCain to become a running-mate for Vice President on the Democratic ticket, **the single condition for acceptance by McCain was that he would guarantee he would not appoint any judge who would overturn the Roe v. Wade decision!
**
Catholic social teaching covers a broad range of important issues. But among these the teaching on abortion holds a unique place. Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to disagree with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. **There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not with regard to abortion and euthanasia.
**

---

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Does it? It seems to reinforce the argument that it does protect guards.

Remeber this noumber is all guards in the state in 125 years. This number does not reflect death row inmates. To look at the prospective more teachers(23) die than guards(11). Here is a link for occupational death rates bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cftb0218.pdf

Roofers lose 82

 

[adrift]

Remeber this noumber is all guards in the state in 125 years. This number does not reflect death row inmates. To look at the prospective more teachers(23) die than guards(11). Here is a link for occupational death rates bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cftb0218.pdf

Roofers lose 82

I don’t know what you think it proves. I didn’t find guards in the list perhaps under legal occupation. Did you notice that deaths from assaults and violent acts teachers had none. The legal occupation had 25?"
I have another question. What would be considered rare?
2006 there were 53 executions
There are about 1.8 million prisoners.

 

[Ray_Scheel]

I don’t know what you think it proves. I didn’t find guards in the list perhaps under legal occupation. Did you notice that deaths from assaults and violent acts teachers had none.

They are listed as “correctional officers”, who with jailers had 5 deaths by assault and violent acts in the year. There are some sources of information here at CAF where you have to get used to the relevant facts usually being the opposite of what the source implied.

I have another question. What would be considered rare?
2006 there were 53 executions
There are about 1.8 million prisoners.

No doubt that’s rare, but that’s probably too broad a comparison. However, comparing the number of death sentences against the number of manslaughter, murder, and homicide convictions in a year still results in a very small percentage.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

I don’t know what you think it proves.

It proves guards are not likely to be killed by Prisoners. And given the death row inmates account for only part of the number (we do not know the actual number) few guards are being killed. So executing all death row inmates to save guards is simply unjustified.

I didn’t find guards in the list perhaps under legal occupation. Did you notice that deaths from assaults and violent acts teachers had none. The legal occupation had 25?"

from the text
Education, training, and library occupations…]… 23
Correctional officers and jailers…]… 11
Roofers…]… 82

I have another question. What would be considered rare?
2006 there were 53 executions
There are about 1.8 million prisoners.

I think the Church means an individual case will rarely qualify. Whether some, all, or none of the cases qualified is an issue, however I am with USCCB suggestion zero is usually the approprate number.

 

[veritashunter]

Question: Isn’t taking a life the same no matter what?

Answer: What about Ananias and Saphira? They were struck dead at Peter’s word for lying about donating money to the Church. That seems pretty insignificant when compared against what Paul did as Saul of Tarsus or what we see on television each day.

Is all sin the same? No, Sacred Scripture in the Old Testament refers to “grave” sin and the New Testament speaks of “deadly” sin and clariifies that all sin is not deadly but some is.

Did Jesus not tell us to “give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s”…but is not everything God’s?

So, there are obvious differences and exceptions in all of these things depending upon circumstance and effect. The Church has always maintained that in serious circumstances it is morally acceptable for governments to institute criminal penalties and punishments equal to the crime committed including execution. But it must be through a fair system of trial and defense. We are to forgive 7 times 70 as individuals, but the government seeking a well-ordered and fair civil society has the duty and responsibility to ensure the safety and rights of many rather than just one.

Where the problem lies is the burden of proof that we (in the USA) use to prove guilt and impose the sentence of death.

The Old Testament (Leviticus I think) says that no accused man shall be put to death on the witness and testimony of only one man…it takes two or more. In the USA we are puttinig people to death with no witnesses at all by means of material evidence only. It should not be “a reasonable doubt”…the burden of proff must be “beyond a shadow of a doubt” when seeking this remedy.

This seems rather hypocritical…not in moral principle but rather in application and implementation. Justice must be fair and accurate or it ceases being just.

God bless.

 

[adrift]

It proves guards are not likely to be killed by Prisoners. And given the death row inmates account for only part of the number (we do not know the actual number) few guards are being killed. So executing all death row inmates to save guards is simply unjustified.

.

Wasn’t that my position. That the death penalty helps deter the deaths of guards? Actually it doesn’t prove anything. The position of the Catechism is that it should be rare. I think it is.

 

[cpayne]

So far the discussion seems rather utilitarian in nature, i.e., if we execute these guilty people we could save these innocent people over here. But isn’t the best reason for the death penalty that in some cases it is morally right? Capital crimes require capital punishments.

 

[Ender]

So far the discussion seems rather utilitarian in nature, i.e., if we execute these guilty people we could save these innocent people over here. But isn’t the best reason for the death penalty that in some cases it is morally right? Capital crimes require capital punishments.

Hopefully your post will return the topic to the issue that matters which is the moral nature of punishment, not its utilitarian benefit. There are times when capital punishment is a moral requirement.

There is no hypocrisy in opposing abortion and supporting capital punishment. It may be that the one is mistaken in doing so but it is uncharitable to label it hypocrisy, and given that we are commanded to always act with charity one might even claim that it is hypocritical to make such a charge.

Ender

 

[Texas_Roofer]

So far the discussion seems rather utilitarian in nature, i.e., if we execute these guilty people we could save these innocent people over here.

guilty is a legal state however lets assume we are only discussing actual horrific killers. How to you know you saved lives? Who knows the future? and thus the reason is rarely is there criminal whose actions are so careless as to provide imminent danger to all around them, and thus warrant the death penalty

 But isn't the best reason for the death penalty that in some cases it is morally right?  **Capital crimes require capital punishments.**

I think this is the definition of vengeance?

 

[Potato1]

Dear God,
We do not know wha to do with this man. He has commited offences so detestable so gross that we are at a loss and do not have adequate facilities to rehabilitate or punish him. He has gone so far off the map of your laws and plans that we cannot have safety of your children while he is still around. The people he has offended are at a loss and having him breath and smile only brings them pain. We appeal to your court of perfect justice. Please have mercy on him as we just cannot in our imperfection. We have given him the chance to repent, told him of your name and your Way. Please exact perfect mercy and justice on him. Grant peace to his victims.

Dear God,
Being pregnant gets in the way of my life. I just want to sleep with whom I want and not have obligations. Take my unbabtized child in this sink and do not exact justice on it or me.

Don’t have the same ring to them do they?

 

[He_Man]

guilty is a legal state however lets assume we are only discussing actual horrific killers. How to you know you saved lives? Who knows the future? and thus the reason is rarely is there criminal whose actions are so careless as to provide imminent danger to all around them, and thus warrant the death penalty I think this is the definition of vengeance?

I think it is the definition of justice, actually.

 

[Potato1]

hypocricy???
How about recieving the Lord in communion, after having voted for or being a pro abortion politician? " Lord you DIED to save your Children. I recieve you, but I will not even be a voice for the unborn as it goes agianst my political beliefs" That my friends is the definition of hypocrisy!

 

[Ender]

… return the topic to the issue that matters which is the moral nature of punishment

Let’s try again - how can any valid discussion of punishment (capital or otherwise) be held when there is no mention of justice? For every crime there is an appropriate level of punishment; the severity of the crime increases the severity of the punishment - this is what justice requires. For what reason can we say that, even though justice may require the death penalty, there is an overriding good that forbids it. Which good would that be?

Ender

 

[zerocrossing]

I’d like pro death sentence catholics to post here and justify it and if there anti abortion why the double standard?

I wouldn’t exactly call myself pro death penalty. I do think it MIGHT be acceptable when there’s 100% indisputable proof and the crime is incredibly heinous. I think the burden of proof should be MUCH higher for capital punishment than for other potential criminal punishments - as in, there should be absolutely 100% no question at all that the person is guilty. “Beyond a reasonable doubt” just doesn’t cut it when a person’s life is at stake.

I favored capital punishment for John Muhammad. And didn’t cry any tears for Tim McVeigh. But I’m really with John Paul II on this one… and frankly need to rethink my position on the sniper. If it is used at all, it should be used very rarely and only under extreme circumstances.

Oh, and I oppose abortion too.