Capital Punishment- right or wrong?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Caesar
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ichabode said:
I would like to make a comment. Many Posters commented on the fact that we place a criminal in jail and the citizens are safe. How fair is it to put a murderer in with a car jacker? Does the person who is in jail for five years have any expectation that we should protect his/her life? I see many “christians” seem not to care for the life of prisioners at all, and would willfully put thier lives in jeopardy by rejecting captial punishment outright. Of course all the guards that must be careful around murderers as well less they have their life taken. Perhaps individual jails for every criminal in the world would be a sane alternative.

PS
I just read post 17 and saw that DaveBJ did mention the protection “safety” of other inmates. I am still not sure why people do not generally think of the prisoners well being. It makes me wonder if those opposed to capital punishment have some alterior motive for not wanting it.
Click to expand...
A very good point. In addition, the notion that the public is “safe” from a killer once he is locked up is false. I will have to do some research to find his name but there is the case of a man who was on death row for multiple murders who had an appeal review coming up and was afraid that three teenage witnesses would be called to testify. While on death row he planned and ordered the murder of these three teenagers and his orders were carried out. If he had been put to death in a timely manner instead of spending over 10 years on death row those three young people would still be alive. If I was one of his lawyers or an anti-death penalty activist I would have to feel responsible for those deaths too.
 
ichabode said:
I would like to make a comment. Many Posters commented on the fact that we place a criminal in jail and the citizens are safe. How fair is it to put a murderer in with a car jacker? Does the person who is in jail for five years have any expectation that we should protect his/her life? I see many “christians” seem not to care for the life of prisioners at all, and would willfully put thier lives in jeopardy by rejecting captial punishment outright. Of course all the guards that must be careful around murderers as well less they have their life taken. Perhaps individual jails for every criminal in the world would be a sane alternative.

PS
I just read post 17 and saw that DaveBJ did mention the protection “safety” of other inmates. I am still not sure why people do not generally think of the prisoners well being. It makes me wonder if those opposed to capital punishment have some alterior motive for not wanting it.
Click to expand...
This is precisely one of the reasons why one of the qualifications for the just use of capital punishment is the protection of others. It does not stipulate any exception for the other inmates as they too must be protected because of their intrinsic dignity as human persons. To solve this problem solitary confinement and the like were put into practice. However, it has been found that some are even able to do harm while away from the general population. For this reason I would argue that even with our abilities in Western Society to restrict and restrain a prisoner there is still room for recourse to Capital Punishment.

I would even be in favor of a mandate that would limit the use of Capital Punishment to those who are serving a life sentence that continue to do violence to others while in that state of custody. This would help mitigate the immoral use of Capital Punishment issued from the bench in such a way that it would restrict it to those who are truly a continued grave threat to humanity even after placed in the most secure of settings.
 
I say it’s evil; i should know, since I am a memeber of several anti death penalty groups. It dosen’t bring victims back, it costs more than an ordinary sentance, and that it denies a person a chance to repent, it defiles souls that use it, and it makes people play God and Jesus, doing roles that should be theirs and theirs only. Would Jesus pull the switch on a death penalty machine? No, 2 wrong never make a right.
 
mosher said:
This is precisely one of the reasons why one of the qualifications for the just use of capital punishment is the protection of others. It does not stipulate any exception for the other inmates as they too must be protected because of their intrinsic dignity as human persons. To solve this problem solitary confinement and the like were put into practice. However, it has been found that some are even able to do harm while away from the general population. For this reason I would argue that even with our abilities in American nations, restrict and restrain a prisoner there is still room for recourse to Capital Punishment.

I would even be in favor of a mandate that would limit the use of Capital Punishment to those who are serving a life sentence that continue to do violence to others while in that state of custody. This would help mitigate the immoral use of Capital Punishment issued from the bench in such a way that it would restrict it to those who are truly a continued grave threat to humanity even after placed in the most secure of settings.
Click to expand...
Do the words thou shalt not kill ring a bell?
 
Many of you are saying its not the same as abortion because the person is not innocent. How does a persons actions make a person less Human and worthy of an execution fit for family pet that bit someone? It sounds to me you are doing the samething as the pro-choice crowd by saying they are not fully Human. A Human is a Human is a Human. We can not make our own judgements saying this person is not fully human because of this, while this person is fully human because of that.
 
Neo_Canaan said:
I say it’s evil; i should know, since I am a memeber of several anti death penalty groups. It dosen’t bring victims back, it costs more than an ordinary sentance, and that it denies a person a chance to repent, it defiles souls that use it, and it makes people play God and Jesus, doing roles that should be theirs and theirs only. Would Jesus pull the switch on a death penalty machine? No, 2 wrong never make a right.
Click to expand...
The Church does not say it is intrinsically evil. The state does have the authority from God in these matters.
 
Neo_Canaan said:
Do the words thou shalt not kill ring a bell?
Click to expand...
2263 The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that constitutes intentional killing. "The act of self-defense can have a double effect: the preservation of one’s own life; and the killing of the aggressor. . . . The one is intended, the other is not."65

2264 Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one’s own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow:

If a man in self-defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful. . . . Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one’s own life than of another’s.66

2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their responsibility.
 
mosher said:
In the work of capital punishment the guidelines given in the Catechism are good. I would argue that it could be taken a step further and the lesson of St. Thomas that Capital Punishment can be imposed for purely punitive means is also morally licit. However, if we just go by the Catechism the added quote of John Paul II is not very helpful on the issue because it assumes that our current prison system will protect society from a harmful person. This is not correct. Even while in solitary there are criminals who are able to order “hits” on people such as mob bosses and drug lords as has been documented by the Justice Department.
Click to expand...
The situation discribed happens even in states that have the death penalty, because many of the honchos who order hits in this way have not been convicted of a crime calling for the death penalty. So one might conclude that we need to expand the grounds for which the death penalty can be imposed. Of course even then, death is neither swift nor sure.
 
Neo_Canaan said:
Do the words thou shalt not kill ring a bell?
Click to expand...
As stated earlier and elsewhere in this thread the word “kill” is in no way an accurate translation of “ratshak” which is the word used in the Decalogue. Rather, murder, in the modern sense of the word is what is being expressed in the fifth commandment. Your point is taken but it is moot.
 
mosher said:
As stated earlier and elsewhere in this thread the word “kill” is in no way an accurate translation of “ratshak” which is the word used in the Decalogue. Rather, murder, in the modern sense of the word is what is being expressed in the fifth commandment. Your point is taken but it is moot.
Click to expand...
I don’t know…:confused:
 
Neo_Canaan said:
I don’t know…:confused:
Click to expand...
A literal translation of the word is “to dash to pieces” it relates to the idea of a clay jar that a person destroys by throwing to the ground out of malice. This is why later in Leviticus there are distinctions made between murder, homicide, manslaughter and the proper punishment attributed to each.
 
My 2cents which is probably only worth 1cent.

As long as the person can be contained, and will be contained with no chance of getting out into society then CP should not be used. The hard part of deciding this situation is that in our liberal society even those accused and convicted of the most heinous crimes are released back into to the public to do the possibility of more harm.

Life in prison with our parole should be set in stone. The only exception would be DNA to prove the wrong person is in jail. No more error on the police or judges & juries part to let them back into society. If they and society say life then life it is and no more legal wrangling.

Forgiveness is fine and expected. But, punishment is required IMHO.
 
KathleenElsie said:
My 2cents which is probably only worth 1cent.

As long as the person can be contained, and will be contained with no chance of getting out into society then CP should not be used. The hard part of deciding this situation is that in our liberal society even those accused and convicted of the most heinous crimes are released back into to the public to do the possibility of more harm.

Life in prison with our parole should be set in stone. The only exception would be DNA to prove the wrong person is in jail. No more error on the police or judges & juries part to let them back into society. If they and society say life then life it is and no more legal wrangling.

Forgiveness is fine and expected. But, punishment is required IMHO.
Click to expand...
I would only add to this that the moral issue is not about a person getting out of prison but rather a person doing further grave harm which includes the welfare of the other prisoners.
 
Well I could have gone into that. But, IMHO, it is the welfare of the public that needs to be protected.

I am also torn on the fact that many seem to “convert” to religions inside prisons and use this “conversion” as a tool to be released. The true conversion is great and should be a great comfort to the prisoner. But it should never be a way to get a sentence reduced.
 
KathleenElsie said:
Well I could have gone into that. But, IMHO, it is the welfare of the public that needs to be protected.

I am also torn on the fact that many seem to “convert” to religions inside prisons and use this “conversion” as a tool to be released. The true conversion is great and should be a great comfort to the prisoner. But it should never be a way to get a sentence reduced.
Click to expand...
Conversion is better than death.
 
I have personally always thought that capital punishment was wrong. The life may not be innocent but someone, one person or more is actually having to flip the switch or inject the drugs. It may seem like the state, some huge group that has no human entity behind it, is the only one the is performing the action but it is individuals that have to perform it. To me it is one thing to be in a war with a person pointing a firearm at another and the action be self defense but for an individual to be strapped down and their life be taken is not the same.
Not to mention I think it is wrong for any government entity to take a life, innocent or not, that is giving the government a lot of power.
Just my thoughts and probably not worth much.
 
Coop73 said:
I have personally always thought that capital punishment was wrong. The life may not be innocent but someone, one person or more is actually having to flip the switch or inject the drugs. It may seem like the state, some huge group that has no human entity behind it, is the only one the is performing the action but it is individuals that have to perform it. To me it is one thing to be in a war with a person pointing a firearm at another and the action be self defense but for an individual to be strapped down and their life be taken is not the same.
Not to mention I think it is wrong for any government entity to take a life, innocent or not, that is giving the government a lot of power.
Just my thoughts and probably not worth much.
Click to expand...
I agree with you on that. Death penalties have never been the answer @ all.
 
Coop73 said:
I have personally always thought that capital punishment was wrong. The life may not be innocent but someone, one person or more is actually having to flip the switch or inject the drugs. It may seem like the state, some huge group that has no human entity behind it, is the only one the is performing the action but it is individuals that have to perform it. To me it is one thing to be in a war with a person pointing a firearm at another and the action be self defense but for an individual to be strapped down and their life be taken is not the same.
Not to mention I think it is wrong for any government entity to take a life, innocent or not, that is giving the government a lot of power.
Just my thoughts and probably not worth much.
Click to expand...
I think that your reasoning is a missunderstanding of what a State is. Sometimes we forget that the State is us. I am not speaking only about Republics such as the United States or Democracies or other “Liberal” forms of Statehood but also of Monarchies and more authoritarian states.

The State exists by the will of the people and it is established for the protection of those same people. As such, it acts as a juridical person and therefore has the right to self-defense. For this reason the leaders of the State act as an Agent for all of us in that action of self-defense (in this case Capital Punishment). If a State lacks this right then it is not a true State as it does not have the ability to do the very thing for which it exists.
 
mosher said:
I think that your reasoning is a missunderstanding of what a State is. Sometimes we forget that the State is us. I am not speaking only about Republics such as the United States or Democracies or other “Liberal” forms of Statehood but also of Monarchies and more authoritarian states.

The State exists by the will of the people and it is established for the protection of those same people. As such, it acts as a juridical person and therefore has the right to self-defense. For this reason the leaders of the State act as an Agent for all of us in that action of self-defense (in this case Capital Punishment). If a State lacks this right then it is not a true State as it does not have the ability to do the very thing for which it exists.
Click to expand...
No, your are wrong, I don’t misunderstand what the State is. You are correct in that it is supposed to represent the people, but it does not always do so in a way that follows our Christian values, such as states that allow abortion. My state does not represent me when it passes laws that allow it. I also have never heard of a single instance where the Vatican did not disagree with whatever state’s, whether U.S. or anothers use of capital punishment.
Not to mention, there are documented cases where individuals have been put to death and information came out later that would have, if not made them innocent, made them guilty of an offense that would not carry the death penalty. One innocent person put to death is one too many.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top