Capital Punishment- right or wrong?

[fix]

murder=intentionally killing, manslaughter=murder, the way I see it, whether its premeditated for years or for split second while defending your own life, its still murder and that makes it immoral.

In the context of our worldly laws, war and soldiers killing each other is morally licit, but at the end of the day war that intentionally takes the lives of the innocent for whatever reason(including self defence) is still immoral.

The Lord says differently.

 

[mosher]

murder=intentionally killing, manslaughter=murder, the way I see it, whether its premeditated for years or for split second while defending your own life, its still murder and that makes it immoral.

I can understand the temptation to over simplify these issues. However, this is not a case that is simple. While you are correct that the amount of time that the act is meditated upon is of generally no consequence it does factor into the morality of the issue. Pre-meditation does not necessarily mean that the act of conceived years, weeks, days, hours ago. Rather it means that the person had enough time to fully reflect on the act. Remember sufficient reflection is a necessary factor for a thing to be a Mortal Sin. But we also have to define terms.

There is a reason why in both scripture and in the study of morals that we make true distinctions between murder, homicide, manslaughter, etc. While all of them involve killing another person they are not all equal “ways” of killing a person. There is a world of difference between killing a person in malice and killing a person in defense. The end result is the same but the disposition of the actor (the person killing) is very different. In any act from lying to killing all aspects of the act must be looked at and not just the result of the act.

In the context of our worldly laws, war and soldiers killing each other is morally licit, but at the end of the day war that intentionally takes the lives of the innocent for whatever reason(including self defence) is still immoral.

This is a very poor definition as it assumes that soldiers are innocents. This is not correct by the very nature of their function. Once a soldier takes an oath to protect and defend and to fight they are no longer innocents by the very nature of their obligation. This does not mean that a whole-scale slaughter can be justified in a way but rather that in the act of war proportionate means of action can be exercised within the scope of objective morality as treated in the act of war.

The Lord says differently.

Exactly. Even apart from the study of morals Sacred Scripture also makes these distinctions in many and various places. When Scripture is taken as a whole on this topic it speaks of the use of killing, war, murder in various ways. Some are treated as never acceptable but others are treated with dignity. So, for any person to overly simplify the issue is to wear a set of blinders.

 

[Neo_Canaan]

I can understand the temptation to over simplify these issues. However, this is not a case that is simple. While you are correct that the amount of time that the act is meditated upon is of generally no consequence it does factor into the morality of the issue. Pre-meditation does not necessarily mean that the act of conceived years, weeks, days, hours ago. Rather it means that the person had enough time to fully reflect on the act. Remember sufficient reflection is a necessary factor for a thing to be a Mortal Sin. But we also have to define terms.

There is a reason why in both scripture and in the study of morals that we make true distinctions between murder, homicide, manslaughter, etc. While all of them involve killing another person they are not all equal “ways” of killing a person. There is a world of difference between killing a person in malice and killing a person in defense. The end result is the same but the disposition of the actor (the person killing) is very different. In any act from lying to killing all aspects of the act must be looked at and not just the result of the act.

This is a very poor definition as it assumes that soldiers are innocents. This is not correct by the very nature of their function. Once a soldier takes an oath to protect and defend and to fight they are no longer innocents by the very nature of their obligation. This does not mean that a whole-scale slaughter can be justified in a way but rather that in the act of war proportionate means of action can be exercised within the scope of objective morality as treated in the act of war.

Exactly. Even apart from the study of morals Sacred Scripture also makes these distinctions in many and various places. When Scripture is taken as a whole on this topic it speaks of the use of killing, war, murder in various ways. Some are treated as never acceptable but others are treated with dignity. So, for any person to overly simplify the issue is to wear a set of blinders.

it’s all crazy. Good thing I joined an anti DP group.

 

[Neo_Canaan]

What makes worse is that soldiers and police, they claim they’re doing a duty, but that also include saying devil talk, e.g., profanity? I’ve heard policers and troopers curse like sailors saying the 14 words we must never say without end. And getting back to the topic, I say the DP should have never existed @ all.

 

[fix]

What makes worse is that soldiers and police, they claim they’re doing a duty, but that also include saying devil talk, e.g., profanity? I’ve heard policers and troopers curse like sailors saying the 14 words we must never say without end. And getting back to the topic, I say the DP should have never existed @ all.

It would be nice if you gave some proof for your position.

 

[Neo_Canaan]

It would be nice if you gave some proof for your position.

Just tune into one of those cop shows or even today’s army fillums.

 

[fix]

Just tune into one of those cop shows or even today’s army fillums.

I was seeking proof that the death penalty is immoral in any application.

 

[Neo_Canaan]

the fact we forgive like jesus said, and that he made a lot of NT changes is a lot of proof. also, 2 wrongs never make a right. I heard stories on some killers’ familes that have stalked state death machine operators

 

[Leeta]

The Church says that the death penalty is licit and IS NOT intrinsically evil, unlike abortion.

An inmate on death row has time to repent and prepare himself to meet the creator.
Let me give you the example my father, an opponent of the death penalty and a conscientious objector, always told us. He said he would not use lethal means to defend his family if we were attacked out of respect for the life of the attacker.
Over the years it has occured to me how unloving my dad was to have been unwilling to protect us, the people he loved most, from harm. So I have changed my position to support the death penalty.
How uncharitable and what an injustice to the innocent to refuse to defend them even with lethal means!
So it is for the state. It would be a grave injustice NOT to defend the innocent and such a state would not be worthy of the name.
Everyone acts like the modern prison systems are so secure.
That is simply not true. The child abusers are often released after a short sentence when the condition is incurable for most of them. What an injustice not to keep them locked up or to execute them in a timely manner! The priest who abused so many in Boston was murdered by fellow inmates within a short time after his incarceration. So the modern prisons are so secure, right!
In Spain, the maximum pprison sentence is 40 years. So how is that protecting society? The modern governments who do not have the death penalty don’t seem to be concerned about protecting society from these criminals. Pediophiles get off lightly and are rarely given a life sentence without parole. They release them and think that because so much mercy has been extended to them that the criminals will have reformed themselves.
The Church says that a Catholic may suppoort the death penalty or oppose it. So would you anti-death penalty supporters inform yourself about what is authoritative in the Church? Read all the Catholic answers tracts for a start, before you go off purporting to give the Church’s postion on something.
Infallible teaching and the ordinary magisterium are starting points. The licitness of capital punishment has always belonged to the ordinary magisterium.
The Church cannot change it. It is not ever going to happen.

 

[Neo_Canaan]

The Church says that the death penalty is licit and IS NOT intrinsically evil, unlike abortion.

An inmate on death row has time to repent and prepare himself to meet the creator.
Let me give you the example my father, an opponent of the death penalty and a conscientious objector, always told us. He said he would not use lethal means to defend his family if we were attacked out of respect for the life of the attacker.
Over the years it has occured to me how unloving my dad was to have been unwilling to protect us, the people he loved most, from harm. So I have changed my position to support the death penalty.
How uncharitable and what an injustice to the innocent to refuse to defend them even with lethal means!
So it is for the state. It would be a grave injustice NOT to defend the innocent and such a state would not be worthy of the name.
Everyone acts like the modern prison systems are so secure.
That is simply not true. The child abusers are often released after a short sentence when the condition is incurable for most of them. What an injustice not to keep them locked up or to execute them in a timely manner! The priest who abused so many in Boston was murdered by fellow inmates within a short time after his incarceration. So the modern prisons are so secure, right!
In Spain, the maximum pprison sentence is 40 years. So how is that protecting society? The modern governments who do not have the death penalty don’t seem to be concerned about protecting society from these criminals. Pediophiles get off lightly and are rarely given a life sentence without parole. They release them and think that because so much mercy has been extended to them that the criminals will have reformed themselves.
The Church says that a Catholic may suppoort the death penalty or oppose it. So would you anti-death penalty supporters inform yourself about what is authoritative in the Church? Read all the Catholic answers tracts for a start, before you go off purporting to give the Church’s postion on something.
Infallible teaching and the ordinary magisterium are starting points. The licitness of capital punishment has always belonged to the ordinary magisterium.
The Church cannot change it. It is not ever going to happen.

Never say never. Sooner or later, they’ll HAVE to change, especially with the new earth on the boards. Keep in mind when a death machine operator murders a killer, he/she defiles his/her own soul in the process. If I had to keep a world safe with giving murder with murder, I want no part of it. I’d rather sabotage evry death machine all over the world than use them on people and send them to hell, thus getting heroism and big fat cat paychecks. Please understand.