Catholics are free to vote/support on pro-death penalty issues, right?

[estesbob]

I am asking this question rhetorically, but why is the first response to the statement that “prisons have problems” is that we should kill them all? Why not deal with the problems and issues that cause the violence in prisons that harms other prisoners and guards? Why does the response have to be more death penalty, more violence?

In my opinion when I read forums on CA that deal with war and the death penalty the first card that is always played is the one that says “The Church says we can support this” so that leads then to the next statement that we need more of this, more often and more quickly. Which to me seems to be counter and completely opposite of the entire thrust of Catholicism, namely justice, peace and mercy.

ChadS

Here is what the Pope said:

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 however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.

---

So the answer is that a catholic can in good coscience support captial punishment and vote for canidates who likewsise support it

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

Cite your sources please. And read your last sentence a little more closely. “Anti death” penalty activists. Anti death. That would be the same as Pro life. And I think that’s the issue we’ve been dancing around.

Actually, that is the issue.

Does executing murderers save innocent lives?

If you were convinced that the death penalty saved lives, would you support it?

 

[CWBetts]

Cite your sources please. And read your last sentence a little more closely. “Anti death” penalty activists. Anti death. That would be the same as Pro life. And I think that’s the issue we’ve been dancing around.

You hit the nail on the head. Can one be truly “pro-life” if they are unconcerned about everyone’s life?

 

[estesbob]

Actually, that is the issue.

Does executing murderers save innocent lives?

If you were convinced that the death penalty saved lives, would you support it?

I believe the issue in this thread is can a catholic support the death penalty and can they vote for a canidate who supports the death penalty. the asnwer to both tose questions is yes.

Personally I oppose the death penatly in all cases .

 

[ChadS]

I don’t know of any innocent men who have been executed, but even if one or two had it is far less than the number of innocent men killed by murderers.

Perhaps if we really want the death penalty to act as a deterrent we should execute even innocent people. That would really show the criminals that we as a society are no longer going to mess around.

For somebody that has shown concern over all the innocents murdered by people you feel should’ve been executed I find it hard to believe that execution of an innocent one or two men is acceptable.

There have been dozens of men released from death row that were later exonerated and I can think of one case where an innocent man was recently executed and also the case of Troy Davis has reached the Supreme Court. So, if the deaths of one or two is okay, how many innocent men would need to be executed before it is no longer okay?

ChadS

 

[Bluegoat]

I don’t think the death penalty is morally acceptable, or practically acceptable in the current US situation even if it was theoretically ok.

As for the second point: the vast majority of death row convicts are poor and non-white and couldn’t pay for a good lawyer. As long as that is the case, I could not see how anyone could justify sending people to be executed.

I would also question how many mistaken executions have to occur before we can say that it is not permissible to allow them.

Now theoretically:
We are all sinners, and as far as the Western Church is concerned, none of us are innocent. Yet we all have salvation offered to us by Christ, in the time God has allotted to us.That is my fundamental problem.

As far as saying criminals kill others in prison or when they are released, that seems a little silly, since the kind of people sent to death row are never released, and often held apart from all other prisoners. I don’t see why that would change. And although killing in self-defense can be allowed if required, we are not allowed to kill someone we think may, or even know intends to commit a murder in the future. (Reminds me of that Tom Cruise movie, I can’t remember the name.)

Although people, individuals, have said the possibility of the death penalty scared them, statistically this is not born out. The death penalty is not a good predictor of the type or amount of crime in a society.

And as for the idea that God will know if the person might have repented at a later date etc. That sounds a lot like “Kill them all, God will know his own.”

 

[estesbob]

I don’t think the death penalty is morally acceptable, or practically acceptable in the current US situation even if it was theoretically ok.

."

Which is nor germane to the question asked by the OP. The answer is REGRADLESS of what others may feel about the death penalty a Catholic can both support it and vote for canidates who support it.

 

[CWBetts]

Which is nor germane to the question asked by the OP. The answer is REGRADLESS of what others may feel about the death penalty a Catholic can both support it and vote for canidates who support it.

Bob, you are correct, as usual. A Catholic is bound to neither support, nor oppose the death penalty, although I find the practice abhorrent

 

[Ender]

You are using the deplorable tactic of hiding behind the Church.

Since the question is whether Catholics are free to support the death penalty I assumed it was appropriate to present what the Church teaches. I’m unsure as to why that is a deplorable tactic or even what it could mean to hide behind the Church.

We are to forgive, and repay evil with good. Vengeance belongs to God.

The obligations of the individual are different from those of the State. The individual is forbidden to punish the guilty while the State is obligated to do so; sin calls for punishment as a matter of law and justice. You are conflating the responsibilities of individuals with the responsibilities of the State but they are not at all the same and are not governed by the same criteria.

Ender

 

[CWBetts]

Since the question is whether Catholics are free to support the death penalty I assumed it was appropriate to present what the Church teaches. I’m unsure as to why that is a deplorable tactic or even what it could mean to hide behind the Church.
The obligations of the individual are different from those of the State. The individual is forbidden to punish the guilty while the State is obligated to do so; sin calls for punishment as a matter of law and justice. You are conflating the responsibilities of individuals with the responsibilities of the State but they are not at all the same and are not governed by the same criteria.

Ender

The Catechism discourages the practice. Deal with it.

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

Bob, you are correct, as usual. A Catholic is bound to neither support, nor oppose the death penalty, although I find the practice abhorrent

You should strive to protect innocent life.

It doesn’t seem as if this is your goal.

 

[estesbob]

You should strive to protect innocent life.

It doesn’t seem as if this is your goal.

My goal in this thread is to correctly state the Teachings of our Church. A Catholic is free to support the death penalty and vote for those who likewise support it.

 

[CWBetts]

You should strive to protect innocent life.

It doesn’t seem as if this is your goal.

I strive to protect all human life

 

[Brendan]

You hit the nail on the head. Can one be truly “pro-life” if they are unconcerned about everyone’s life?

Pope Pius XII addressed this question in 1957. He was giving an audience to a group of medical professionals. In his talk, he made it clear that there is a distinction between abortion and capital punishment as a ‘right to life’ issue

Here are his words

Even when there is question of the execution of a condemned man, the State does not dispose of the individual’s right to life. In this case, it is reserved to the public power to deprive the condemned person of the enjoyment of life in expiation of his crime when, by his crime, he has already dispossessed himself of his right to life.

So if the Pope made a disctintion and saw no discongruity, why should we?

 

[Bluegoat]

Pope Pius XII addressed this question in 1957. He was giving an audience to a group of medical professionals. In his talk, he made it clear that there is a distinction between abortion and capital punishment as a ‘right to life’ issue

Here are his words

So if the Pope made a disctintion and saw no discongruity, why should we?

Can a person dispossess himself of his right to life? That seems a bit suspect to me.Rather like disposessing yourself of human nature. We know people who try to do that by acting like animals, but we hold them culpable as human beings because human nature, and it’s obligations, cannot be shed. This also means that despite their behavior, we are obliged to treat them as humans and not as animals.

I am not sure that the right to life, and the obligation to live, are any different.

 

[Bluegoat]

Which is nor germane to the question asked by the OP. The answer is REGRADLESS of what others may feel about the death penalty a Catholic can both support it and vote for canidates who support it.

My opinion no, but the specific situation could well be a factor I think. It would not be appropriate for a Catholic to support the death penalty in a place where it was somehow abused or was where justice was not being served by it, even if it could, theoretically, be ok.

So, in the US, is it abused, or do injustices come as a result? What scenarios would mean that was the case? Obviously as a way to silence political dissident would be bad, for example.

I tend to think the fact that a major factor in determining the likelihood of being sentanced to death being poverty or wealth is a big problem in supporting the current system in the US.

 

[CWBetts]

Pope Pius XII addressed this question in 1957. He was giving an audience to a group of medical professionals. In his talk, he made it clear that there is a distinction between abortion and capital punishment as a ‘right to life’ issue

Here are his words

So if the Pope made a disctintion and saw no discongruity, why should we?

Because the the Catechism takes precedence over a non-infallible statement by any Pope.

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

Because the the Catechism takes precedence over a non-infallible statement by any Pope.

True, but in this case there is no conflict.

 

[cymonk]

Thought I would tack the entire 2267 section of the Catechism below:
vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a5.htm

I don’t believe, read in its entirety, deterance is an acceptable reason for the death penalty. Our justice should be attempting to “render one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm”, not detering others from commiting the same crime. The last statement in the Catechism says it well, “the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity are very rare, if not practically nonexistent.”

Its a little more of a stretch, but hypathectically if deterance of murder was a sufficient reason to allow us to kill someone, why not kill the entire family of the one who committed the crime.

Pax,
Cymonk

"2267 Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.

"If, however, nonlethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.

“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 nonexistent.”

 

[CWBetts]

True, but in this case there is no conflict.

The Catechism discourages use of the death penalty, allowing only if there is no nonlethal means to protect the public.