L
Lost_Wanderer
Guest
But it does say that it’s still an option (A last-resort type if I understood it correctly).
- Status
V
Valke2
Guest
One relies on the value of justice and the other on the value of life.
I think you can be in favor of one and against the other.
Stephen168
New member
I agree.
Abortion is wrong every time.
Capital punishment has a possibility of being OK but I can’t think of a situation in the western world where it would be right.
R
ralphinal
Guest
I agree so long as you respect life in both. For example, it should not be about revenge or as a warning to others. The condemned should not be made into a side-show, nor should the execution. Every step should be taken to insure a fair process and a quick and painless death.
Now, that does not mean that I support capitol punishment. I can just see how you can be anti-abortion and not anti-death penalty.
L
Lost_Wanderer
Guest
Psychotic serial killers could be a case.
R
ralphinal
Guest
A possible case could be if a member of a special forces unit went psychotic and became a serial killer. As he is too dangerous to be left in general population, and he may not be able to be controlled by guards, there may be no other option.
Another possible, perhaps more likely, is in the case of a natural disaster that leads to a collapse of local government and total martial law. As there would not be enough men to guard the most dangerous prisoners and keep the peace, the death penalty would be needed.
Another possible, perhaps more likely, is in the case of a natural disaster that leads to a collapse of local government and total martial law. As there would not be enough men to guard the most dangerous prisoners and keep the peace, the death penalty would be needed.
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
Then you share responsibility for the murders committed by those you keep alive.
Evil prevails when good men do nothing.
Evil prevails when good men do nothing.
J
JMJ_coder
Guest
Yes, you are reading them wrong. From the Catechism:
Capital Punishment
2266 The State’s effort to contain the spread of behaviors injurious to human rights and the fundamental rules of civil coexistence corresponds to the requirement of watching over the common good. Legitimate public authority has the right and duty to inflict penalties commensurate with the gravity of the crime. the primary scope of the penalty is to redress the disorder caused by the offense. When his punishment is voluntarily accepted by the offender, it takes on the value of expiation. Moreover, punishment, in addition to preserving public order and the safety of persons, has a medicinal scope: as far as possible it should contribute to the correction of the offender.67
2267 The traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude, presupposing full ascertainment of the identity and responsibility of the offender, recourse to the death penalty, when this is the only practicable way to defend the lives of human beings effectively against the aggressor.
"If, instead, bloodless means are sufficient to defend against the aggressor and to protect the safety of persons, public authority should limit itself to such means, because they better correspond to the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.
"Today, in fact, given the means at the State’s disposal to effectively repress crime by rendering inoffensive the one who has committed it, without depriving him definitively of the possibility of redeeming himself, cases of absolute necessity for suppression of the offender ‘today … are very rare, if not practically non-existent.’[John Paul II, Evangelium vitae 56.]
The Catechism teaches that, if so needed, capitol punishment is not against Catholic teaching. The only points to debate is what determines necessity in this case and if our government can safely protect society without capitol punishment.
If you have a particular statement from the USCCB in mind, we can look at that one, too.
L
Logos385
Guest
I would say that we can all agree we don’t want abortions to occur, but the reality is they will, so the real goal we all would strive for is to have the least abortions possible occurring, and after that goal is the overall safety of the lives involved…
It’s true that in places where abortion is illegal, this has no luck as a deterrent. Whether or not abortion is illegal, those desperately wanting it will still get it. The Pro-Choice, Pro-Life debate is not about decreasing the number of abortions that occur, because outlawing it has been shown to not do this in the slightest. Next we must move to the overall safety of the lives involved- when abortions are illegal, the women receiving them have to resort to what are commonly known as “back-alley abortions” which are quite dangerous, illegal and could be fatal. These abortions account for 13% of female deaths during pregnancy/childbirth. However, when abortion is legal, the procedure is much, much safer.
The study I will link to states, “The most applicable point of the study to the American debate on abortion is that declaring abortion illegal does little to stop the process, it just makes it much more dangerous for the women undergoing the procedure.”
The issue is not stopping abortions, it is simply keeping the number of lives that do not cease to be at the maximum, and being pro-choice allows abortions to be much, much safer for the mother. Thus, being pro-choice is in fact the way to preserve life in the fullest. I am pro-choice (Pro-women’s rights to a clean and safe medical procedure), not pro-life (anti-women’s rights, endangering mothers everywhere).
veracifier.com/post/3258/study-published-outlawing-abortion-does-not-decrease-abortion-rates
I am also against capital punishment: tax-payer dollars fund this, thus, when capital punishment is enacted, every single person (supporting the death penalty or not) is contributing to the murder of a human life. If you think murderers get away too easily, lobby to improve the judiciary or court systems, or regulate the Penal system more effectively, don’t cop out and kill the problem at hand. Plus, death is an escape, prison is a punishment.
It’s true that in places where abortion is illegal, this has no luck as a deterrent. Whether or not abortion is illegal, those desperately wanting it will still get it. The Pro-Choice, Pro-Life debate is not about decreasing the number of abortions that occur, because outlawing it has been shown to not do this in the slightest. Next we must move to the overall safety of the lives involved- when abortions are illegal, the women receiving them have to resort to what are commonly known as “back-alley abortions” which are quite dangerous, illegal and could be fatal. These abortions account for 13% of female deaths during pregnancy/childbirth. However, when abortion is legal, the procedure is much, much safer.
The study I will link to states, “The most applicable point of the study to the American debate on abortion is that declaring abortion illegal does little to stop the process, it just makes it much more dangerous for the women undergoing the procedure.”
The issue is not stopping abortions, it is simply keeping the number of lives that do not cease to be at the maximum, and being pro-choice allows abortions to be much, much safer for the mother. Thus, being pro-choice is in fact the way to preserve life in the fullest. I am pro-choice (Pro-women’s rights to a clean and safe medical procedure), not pro-life (anti-women’s rights, endangering mothers everywhere).
veracifier.com/post/3258/study-published-outlawing-abortion-does-not-decrease-abortion-rates
I am also against capital punishment: tax-payer dollars fund this, thus, when capital punishment is enacted, every single person (supporting the death penalty or not) is contributing to the murder of a human life. If you think murderers get away too easily, lobby to improve the judiciary or court systems, or regulate the Penal system more effectively, don’t cop out and kill the problem at hand. Plus, death is an escape, prison is a punishment.
O
O.S.Luke
Guest
I stand corrected. It certainly seems like splitting hairs to fit as you wish, though. In the Western world, I cannot see a way to justify capital punishment. I can see how people could circumvent it to fulfill the letter of the law (Catechism) without fulfilling its intent.
We Westerners are good at that.
We Westerners are good at that.
Stephen168
New member
This is the same as my Gilligan’s Island scenario that I use to explain what I believe the Catechism is saying. The Professor goes crazy and kills Mr. Howell. As a matter of self defense for the group with no prison, it may be OK for the Skipper to kill the Professor.
O
O.S.Luke
Guest
And those who would eradicate evil by evil means have simply perpetuated evil, not triumphed over it.
J
JMJ_coder
Guest
We all wish murder wouldn’t occur, but in reality they will – so let’s make it safe for the murderers to commit their crime.
We all wish cars wouldn’t be stolen, but in reality they will – so roll down your window so the thief won’t hurt himself when he breaks open your window.
R
ralphinal
Guest
Not to mention that only the professor could build a prison that could hold the professor…
Stephen168
New member
Are you suggesting that politicians, and juries currently review the Catechism before they make decisions?
E
elvisman
Guest
E
elvisman
Guest
WRONG.
I read a lot of your posts and while many are filled with a certain personal conviction, they don’t contain much fact.
The United States is currently #24 on the list of countries with high murder rates. We are behind countries such as Mexico, Latvia, Lithuania, Venezuela, Columbia, Ukraine, Russia, South Africa, Jamaica and a host of others.
It always cracks me up when I hear or read the rantings of America-haters. A lot of steam but not much in the pot.
A
AaronK88
Guest
I find it funny that as Catholics, you guys go by the ideals of American society over Catholic doctrine. If you paid the slightest bit of attention, you would know that most Catholics in Europe, including the Pope, and our previous Pope, condemn the death penalty. If the Pope condemns it, then that is enough for me.
N
notself
Guest
By your very definition, psychotic, the killer is not in his right mind. To kill someone who is not responsible for his actions is barbaric. In sounds more like euthanasia than capital punishment.Psychotic serial killers could be a case.
There are institutions for the criminally insane that are very high security.
N
notself
Guest
You share the responsibility for the innocents who are executed.
I do not share the responsibility for the death caused by a murderer sentenced to life in prison while in prison. That responsibility belongs to the warden for failing to properly secure the prisoner.
Being a good person, I am taking action against capital punishment by supporting Amnesty International.
- Status