Abortion vs Captial Punishment

[Orionthehunter]

itsjustdave1988:

Then you haven’t studied Catholicism. The Roman Catechism, was not an “American” catechism, and it stated: “Another kind of lawful slaying belongs to the civil authorities, to whom is entrusted power of life and death, by the legal and judicious exercise of which they punish the guilty and protect the innocent.” If I’m not mistaken, the Catholic Church of Australia abides by magisterial doctrines, right?

The point, which seems you missed is this: just capital punishment and just war are congruent with Catholic doctrine, abortion is not. Whether you advocate for war or the death penalty in particular is irrelevent. Catholics are bound by canon law to give their religious submission of intellect and will to Catholic doctrine. “Christ’s faithful are therefore to ensure that they avoid whatever does not accord with that doctrine.” (canon 752).

We can be against or for capital punishment in any particular circumstance while admitting that it is not intrinsically evil, doctrinally speaking. Yet, and this part is very important, we cannot be for deliberate abortion, as it is always intrinsically evil. Thus, there are some party platforms that proudly advocate that which is instrinsically evil according to Divine and Catholic faith, the platform given by the Communist Party and Democratic Party are examples.

I think you missed the point of Cadence. He didn’t assert that the Death Penalty was intrinsically evil. He just asked two questions:

Whether or not it is necessary to protect society or the same protection can be afforded via other means?

Whether or not we are confident it is applied appropriately in ever case? Alternatively, in the event it might be applied inappropriately, might we not be better served to protect us from finality of an inappropriate application by not utilizing it as a matter of policy (calling it for in certain crimes) or even allowing it to be used.

Cadence also asked us to examine the morality of the death penalty if our rationale is economical (cheaper to execute than incarcerate).

Personally, I’m opposed to the DP in the US for the points raised by Cadence. This being said, I don’t like how it is always lumped in w/ the abortion issue. They are not on the same plane. Abortion is always murder. Execution of a convicted criminal is not always so. However, for me it is an act of mercy and charity to not execute even in teh face of extreme evil actions on the part of the convict. Might not our mercy and charity be a clarion call to the conversion of this person or at least giving the person years to allow the Holy Spirit to speak to them be of merit?

 

[Cadence]

Thanks, you are right - I was not arguing about it being intrinsically evil or not, nor was I arguing what it says in the Catechism. I was arguing if capital punishment can be put into effect in a christian way.
By the way - I’m a she not a he

 

[Phil_M]

mike182d:

Furthermore, even giving a dime to Africa right now is a complete waste of money. Billions of dollars from around the world gets sent to Africa and yet the conditions have *never *improved. Money isn’t the problem.

First of all, most of the “needy” in Africa that you think you’re sending it to don’t even see it as it passes through the hands of corrupt governments and warlords. Secondly, I believe in the “give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man how to fish, feed him for a lifetime” principle. The state of people’s conditions will never change with handouts, it just makes them dependent.

Africa is such a fertile Continent and there is no reason why anyone should be poor there. What needs to be done is oust the warlords, rebuild their infrastructure, and help them become self-sufficient on Africa’s own magnificent resources.

Throwing money at Africa doesn’t do a darn thing to better the situation.

Absolutely right, we need to oust the warlords, rebuild, and so on. But rebuilding costs money. Money the US government can give, and money that many African people don’t have

I agree about the “teach a man to fish” thing, but how would it hurt to give 1% of the federal budget to these people? 1%, when it doesn’t end up in the wrong hands, can send people to school, treat illnesses, help people to start businesses, and provide clean water. 1% can help them to help themselves, which is what you’re saying is the best thing to do in this case.

 

[Phil_M]

mike182d:

Isn’t the U.S. budget for the U.S.? Oh, that’s right, we’re the world police.

Yeah, but with the money that this country has, you’d think it’d be able to help out the poor a bit more than it is now. Insane amounts of money are going to homeland security, military spending, and tax cuts for the wealthy. That shouldn’t be, not when millions of people people all over the world are living in poverty

mike182d:

So, when God tells the Israelites to kill other men, also made in His image, God is attacking Himself?

Not very good logic and that Scripture does nothing to help your position. For that one passage in Genesis, there are entire *books *in the Old Testament stating otherwise.

God hasn’t told our government to execute people on death row. If he did, I’d have no problem with Capital Punishment

Jesus said not to take revenge on our enemies, that God loves the good and the bad, and that we should forgive one another. That’s in the Bible, so Scripture does help my position on the death penalty

 

[teree1985]

I am personally troubled by the use of capital punishment in our country. I suppose theoretically I fit the stereotype that as a registered Democrate I am quicker to be outraged by capital punishment than abortion- although never in a million years would I consider abortion acceptible, right or anything other then inherently evil. And praise God that, I think now 2 states, have banned most abortions!!! But there is an intrinsic evil the I find with capital punishment that puts it differently for me than abortion- to deprive somebody of dying at a natural time, is to say God doesn’t know what he’s doing. If a criminal is executed without having reconciled with the Almighty, have we helped to lead anyone closer to Christ? While we may never know the criminal’s true heart or state of his or her soul at the time of death, I personally prefer to give that criminal, as well as every other soul on this planet, every second to turn or return to the Father. And again- this is not to make abortion a lesser of evils, but I do believe that they are the Holy Innocence of our times and they are held close to God forever.

As for voting- I can’t vote just for the “life issues.” Our being isn’t about just whether we get to see the light of day and die a natural and unexpediated death. There are the many minutes, days, and years in between. People do not have access to food, clothing, shelter, medical care, and education. People are subjected to cruel labor conditions, bigotry and abuse. These are life issues too. These are the issuse that happen while we are alive. Its a package deal.

Pray… hard. Vote, whether you like the candidates running or not- its what we should do as citizens. But vote for the one that, after careful and prayerful consideration, you believe is most likely to uphold human dignity and be open to the will of the Father. And then pray for the leaders and appeal to them for legislation that coincides with your values.

Nobody is perfect. Remember-Jesus came to call sinners.

And on one other comment- that we are not judged by the results of our actions…
I grew up with an expression- the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

 

[fix]

teree1985:

But there is an intrinsic evil the I find with capital punishment that puts it differently for me than abortion- to deprive somebody of dying at a natural time, is to say God doesn’t know what he’s doing.

But is not intrinsically evil. It cannot be. The state has the authority, as the Church says, to authorize capital punishment,

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Orionthehunter:

Whether or not it is necessary to protect society or the same protection can be afforded via other means?

Neither am I pro-death penalty, as I have little confidence in the justice of our justice system. Yet, the thesis of the original post is that there exists a dilemma for Catholic voters. That’s the context in which the replies have been provided. Cadence may be less shocked by the replies if she understood them in the context of the original poster’s thesis.

From a doctrinal perspective, there is no dilemma, as a party platform that supports capital punishment is not contrary to Catholic doctrine, yet a party platform that supports abortion is.

A Catholic may freely either agree or disagree that it is prudent to maintain capital punishment as lawful in this country, yet deliberate abortion can never be licit. No dilemma.

However, what you call “same protection” is difficult to gauge. Really bad people have been known to escape prison and do really bad things. If they were dead, a greater protection would have been afforded our society. Yet, “the risk is not so much that dangerous and justly judged criminals will escape from prison; the risk is that we will let them out. It has been a long time since a “life sentence” meant that the prisoner would stay in prison for the rest of his natural life.” (J. Budziszewski,* Capital Punishment: The Case for Justice, First Things, Aug/Sep 2004, 39-45).*

 

[David_Zampino]

JoeyWarren:

In the upcoming elections, there persist delimnas for Catholics.

If you vote Democratic, you vote for a party that for the most part supports Pro Choice and for the most part rejects the Death Penalty.

If you vote Republican the opposite is true. you vote for a party that supports Pro Life and for the most part supports the Death Penalty.

Catholics believe both Pro Choice and the Capital Punishment is a sin.

So who do you vote for then?

MURDER by abortion?

or

MURDER by the belief of “A Murder for a Murder”.

I personally see this as a quandary.

I’m a political independant, in a state which allows such to vote in primaries – so I am fortunate.

I say this so that people will not accuse me of being a shill for one party over another.

The abortion issue DOES NOT EQUAL the death penalty issue.

IT NEVER HAS.

The stance of the Church against abortion has been clear since the Didache (AD 60-80) and has been uncompromising and unyielding.

The stance of the Church on the death penalty has evolved throughout the centuries based on a large number of factors.

Even today, the Catechism, while strongly suggesting that capital punishment needs to be applied only sparingly – if, in fact, at all, the issues do not remain compatible.

Those who would equate the two issues are promoting a fallacy.

1,200,000 innocent lives – per year – which the Church has always forbidden? NOT the equivalent of capital punishment – even in the most capital punishment friendly states in America.

The issues are as different as peas and apples.

Blessings,

 

[DreadVandal]

Phil M:

Yeah, but with the money that this country has, you’d think it’d be able to help out the poor a bit more than it is now. Insane amounts of money are going to homeland security, military spending, and tax cuts for the wealthy. That shouldn’t be, not when millions of people people all over the world are living in poverty

God hasn’t told our government to execute people on death row. If he did, I’d have no problem with Capital Punishment

Jesus said not to take revenge on our enemies, that God loves the good and the bad, and that we should forgive one another. That’s in the Bible, so Scripture does help my position on the death penalty

Two things, the command to use the death penalty is given to governments as such, in other words, all governments. Secondly, teachings about forgieveness, turning the other cheek, and so forth do not apply to the state; they apply to the Church in her personal spiritual life. The state is to rule with God’s cold justice. The Church is to be the counterbalance by providing God’s mercy. But neither should interfere in the affairs of the other.

 

[Liberalsaved]

That’s a hard question. DOn’t for a second beleive it is or should be as black and white as you’ve been told. Reconciling faith and legality and politics is one of the hardest parts of handling freedom.

 

[wjp984]

JoeyWarren:

Most, not all.
Just like most Republican oppose abortions, but not all

If you know of one Democratic presidential candidate that opposed the death penalty let me know since I usually hear both the Republican and Democratic candidate supporting it in the deabtes.

 

[Brendan]

teree1985:

I But there is an intrinsic evil the I find with capital punishment that puts it differently for me than abortion- .

But the Church has declared time and time again that the D.P. is NOT intrinsically evil.

Do you know what that term, “Intrinsically evil” means. It means that there is never a time, place or situation where the particualr moral action can ever be morally justified.

The Church has stated, in all of it’s teachings, that there are time, abiet very rare ones, where is is morally justified, even morally required, to use the D.P.

Direct Abortion, the deliberate targeting of a child for death, IS intrinsically evil, there can never be a justification for it.

The D.P. does not fall into that category.

One can certainly say that there is no moral need for the D.P in the United States ( I am personally of that opinion, I am very proud to be from Michigan, the first English speaking juristidction in the world to ban the use of D.P.)

One cannot say, however, that D.P is evil in every circumstance. To do so would be to teach contrary to the Church on Faith and Morals.

 

[Orionthehunter]

teree1985:

But there is an intrinsic evil the I find with capital punishment that puts it differently for me than abortion- to deprive somebody of dying at a natural time, is to say God doesn’t know what he’s doing.

I’m having a hard time understanding how capital punishment is different than abortion. In both cases, you are denying somebody of dying at a natural time.

P.S. While i’m against the dp, I don’t agree that the dp necessarily means that God doesn’t know what He is doing. the DP can be part of his plan.

 

[levi86]

When an individual is sentenced by a court there are five factors that are taken into consideration when passing sentence, restoration, retribution, rehabilitation, protection and exemplary based punishments.

Now do we all accept that a life should not be taken unless absolutely necessary? A life should not be taken in vain right?

Restoration: This is clearly not applicable in a murder conviction, as a life can never be restored and as such is not taken into consideration in any murder sentence

Rehabilitation: If an individual is sentenced to death there is no possibility for rehabilitation.

Protection of the public: Life imprisonment without parole is equally as effective in protecting society as an execution.

Retribution: Retribution/revenge is NEVER permissible! This was one of Our Lords fundamental doctrines.

Exemplary: If anyone can provide me with ANY statistics showing that the death penalty provides an effective deterrent than I’m all ears.

Clearly the death penalty is not essential and should never be enforced; to knowingly take any life in vain is a grave sin.

 

[pnewton]

levi86:

Protection of the public: Life imprisonment without parole is equally as effective in protecting society as an execution.

I have to strongly disagree with this statement. Criminals behind bars commit more crime, including assault and homocide than executed people (per capita).

I said this once before here, the idea that we can safely incarcerate the most violent of offenders and assure that they will not kill or assault again, is a myth.

 

[pnewton]

Orionthehunter:

I’m having a hard time understanding how capital punishment is different than abortion. In both cases, you are denying somebody of dying at a natural time.
.

One takes the life of the innocent for selfish reasons.
One take the life of the guilty, often for reason of revenge, but sometimes to protect the innocent.

One is alway objectively a moral evil and never permissible.
One is allowed only permissible in a very narrow set of circumstances.

 

[Brendan]

Orionthehunter:

I’m having a hard time understanding how capital punishment is different than abortion. In both cases, you are denying somebody of dying at a natural time.

P.S. While i’m against the dp, I don’t agree that the dp necessarily means that God doesn’t know what He is doing. the DP can be part of his plan.

Abortion is the taking of an innocent life, a life that has done nothing to warrant it’s loss. The taking of this life does nothing to further Justice, or to protect society. The child in question performed no actions that it knew could be punishibale by death.

In the licit use of the D.P., on the other hand, can serve to protect society and serve the cause of Justice. The criminal knowingly and willfully committed an action whose punishment includes death. The criminal, by an act of will, chose to be in that postion.

In addition, there is a spiritual aspect as well.

The goal of the Church is for all to achieve heaven

In the use of the D.P. the criminal is given the chance to repent. The willing acceptance of just punishment carries with it a plenary indulgence. So if the criminal accepts their guilt, repents of it and accepts their just punishment, all purgation is negated.

The child, on the other hand, loses any chance of recieving the Sacrament of Baptism. As such, the Church recognizes no guarantee that this child will experience Heaven.

The criminal has that chance, the baby might not.

 

[DreadVandal]

levi86:

When an individual is sentenced by a court there are five factors that are taken into consideration when passing sentence, restoration, retribution, rehabilitation, protection and exemplary based punishments.

Now do we all accept that a life should not be taken unless absolutely necessary? A life should not be taken in vain right?

Restoration: This is clearly not applicable in a murder conviction, as a life can never be restored and as such is not taken into consideration in any murder sentence

Rehabilitation: If an individual is sentenced to death there is no possibility for rehabilitation.

Protection of the public: Life imprisonment without parole is equally as effective in protecting society as an execution.

Retribution: Retribution/revenge is NEVER permissible! This was one of Our Lords fundamental doctrines.

Exemplary: If anyone can provide me with ANY statistics showing that the death penalty provides an effective deterrent than I’m all ears.

Clearly the death penalty is not essential and should never be enforced; to knowingly take any life in vain is a grave sin.

Actually, not all revenge is wrong. Christians are not to seek personal revenge against others; but the state is the lawful avenger according to the CCC (and Scripture). Also, the death penalty is rehabilitative in two ways: first, it forces the condemned to loook at death and make a decision. There is no indefinite postponing of conversion. Secondly, and this is also how it is restorative, the condemned expiates his crime and restores the balance of justice.

 

[Brendan]

levi86:

Rehabilitation: If an individual is sentenced to death there is no possibility for rehabilitation.
.

Why is that? Are they denied the chance to repent of their crimes prior to execution?

Read my post above about Timothy McVeigh (#64)

Are you saying that the execution prevented his rehabilitation?

 

[levi86]

DreadVandal:

Actually, not all revenge is wrong. Christians are not to seek personal revenge against others; but the state is the lawful avenger according to the CCC (and Scripture). .

Could you please show me where either of the two say that revenge is permitted?