D
dmelosi
Guest
A blanket statement that says it is not necessary in today’s world is not correct.
If Sadaam were not executed, how many more murders would have happened?
- Status
If Sadaam were not executed, how many more murders would have happened?
P
pnewton
Guest
As a Christian one should respect the Truth enough not to suggest that one is “somehow God like” base on a false accusation. I never said what you claim I said. What I did say neither implied a position on Capital Punishment or anything at all about an individual life. I said:
Again, this implies not one single thing about an individual or group, even a position on the death penalty. Certain event and paths in life change an individual. Yes, I really believe that is true. Some people I know measure their entire life from the day they first took a life, to everything after.
BTW - You do not even know what my postition is on the death penalty. I am very much in the middle. It is one of my most frequently posted topics, though.
E
Eddie_Mac
Guest
Faced with certain death at an executioner’s hand they can repent too.
Comparing abortion to capital punishment is absurd.
I know of people who have come face to face with evil and forgiven.
Criminals who are sentenced to die are often forgiven. They still must endure their punishment.
Call it redemptive suffering. Redemptive suffering is a church teaching too.
Eddie Mac
P
pnewton
Guest
Furthermore, forgiveness* must* be part of any Christian application of the death penalty. Without it, legitimate punishment becomes mere retribution.
J
JaneGrey
Guest
Fair enough, I never knew what your position was but was responding more to Eddie Mac who very much sounded as though he was saying what I accused him of. I would never call anyone ‘‘God-like’’. Dont you realise my point was that no one can make blanket statements about people about any one group of people(which to me Eddie Mac was doing) because as mere humans we cant read minds?
Anyway sorry if you felt attacked but Eddie Mac quoted something you said and it seemed as though you implied that some people dont have to personally deal with evil men or something to that effect. I took offense mostly to Eddie Mac’s post, and since I did not read yours I wont comment on what you said further.
BTW good to know you are in the middle at least. Mostly I am against the death penalty, but many times I have found myself on the fence because of things Ive seen. Yet I think many people (maybe they cant help it) automatically think that if you are against the death penalty it means you live in a dream world.
J
JaneGrey
Guest
Fine, but I still dont see how this helps rid society of evil.
Thats your opinion. Iam not condoning abortion, just saying that there is so much difference between that and someone brutally slashing a human being for the reasons it usually happens-money, envy, revenge, plain rage. Still, I dont think humans have the right to end these humans’ lives if not necessary, however evil they appear. Similarly, if one is against abortion, I dont think they have the right to blow up an abortion clinic.
Says who? Many people believe that but it doesnt make it right. If you say the Church condones it why havent they made it explicitly clear. Only God has the right to forgive and the right to decide when a person’s life ends. The way I see it, one can experince hell or a semblance of it here on earth. I thought in Christianity death is not a punishment but a celebration anyway. This is coming from person who has had people taken away by murder. It would not make me feel any better or safer if the murderer was put to death.
S
severus68
Guest
I burst out laughing when I read your post.
I feel sorry for you. Do you not know what a discussion is? Why do you take everything so personally? It is not all about you but about important issues.
I was not talking about places but about the past.
You did throw terms around without explanations.
Perhaps you need to understand what civility means.
E
Eddie_Mac
Guest
I am being civil. Maybe you need to learn to take the literal meaning of what people say and broaden your horizons instead of twisting things around.
Eddie Mac
E
Eddie_Mac
Guest
E
Eddie_Mac
Guest
Again, if you do not intend on discussing this without twisting my comments then I will move on. In a civil manner, of course.
Eddie Mac
J
JaneGrey
Guest
Um people have the right to forgive but only God has the right to forgive sins?!! Okay…
I mentioned forgiveness to demonstrate that God has this ultimate right. Yes we can forgive those who sin against us, but im talking about a pardon on a bigger scale here. Only God knows for sure if a certain criminal has repented or is to go straight to hell. I dont think we as humans have the right to decide when the latter happens. However I agree it is a subjective issue so I dont put down those with different views and its why im still here.
Even if in a twisted way people had the right as you say to take away life (through capital punishment) it will happen at some point that a person is wrongfully convicted. In fact this can happen quite easily. Human beings do not have perfect judgement. One person wrongfully executed is too many to me (and many).
I
iluvburpees
Guest
Can you provide some evidence for this claim?
And therefore, according to this, no worse than abortion. This is a chilling statement. If capital punishment is “no better” than abortion, then it is pretty much a fifth sin crying out to heaven for vengeance.
It scares me that you put innocent babies on the same level as convicted criminals.
What you wish is irrelevant, since we are dealing with justice and punishment, not emotions, Although you may forgive the criminal (and it is highly commendable if you are even able to), it does not change the fact that the state has a right and duty to protect society.
Yes, if you were to kill him on your own, it would be vengeance and a sin.
Correct. It does not make it right. Which is why the state carries it out, since they have the lawful authority to do so.
If imprisonment is a pretty awful punishment, why do the anti-death penalty individuals always claim to be “merciful?”
This is simply wrong. The greatest chance for a criminal to repent of his crime(s) is when he knows he is to die in the near future. When he has this knowledge, he knows that he has very little time to “think about it.” More time does not mean a greater chance of saving one’s soul. The beautiful example of St. Therese and Pranzini shows the power of capital punishment combined with prayer.
S
severus68
Guest
Thank you.
E
Eddie_Mac
Guest
Jesus taught us the Lord’s prayer. “Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those…”
Now, tell me who else forgives sins, please.
Eddie Mac
J
JaneGrey
Guest
wOULD you like to be more specific about what you are asking me to provide evidence for? If it is my opinion that capital punishment will not rid society of evil, then understand that I call it my opinion and I do not claim to have the gospel truth on everything. I have lived both in countries where there was the death penalty and those without. There were no less rapes and murders reported in the countries with capital punishment. Before South Africa abolished the death penalty in 1995 there were just as many murders.
Now, this may be due to other factors. For this same reason, the death penalty will not work to significantly reduce the number of killers because there are always other factors at work. Capital punishment does not guarantee safety, so that cant be used as an excuse to kill criminals.
It may scare you but Ive already stated that Im not condoning abortion and wont say it again. Also I have no intention of getting into an abortion debate here.It scares me that you put innocent babies on the same level as convicted criminals.
What I wish is irrelevant to you and most of society yes, but I was speaking more about my experience haiving known people in my life taken away by murder. Read my posts, I want the state to protect society as much as anyone else (and then maybe my friend wouldnt be gone). We differ on how we think is an effective way for the state to do this.
You repeat the point I was making. However can we ascertain the motives of everyone involved in the process of condemning someone to death i.e. judges, jury, prosecutors, the executioners themselves? The state as a whole may have the noble motive of wanting to protect society. Fair enough. But humans are imperfect, and we all have our own individual motives. I dont think humans can be trusted to end a life, for the right reasons. For instance think about what it is like to have a job as an executioner. Over time they must become desensitised to the act of killing, much like slaughterhouse workers. This contributes I beleive to the culture of death I spoke of earlier. It is not so different to doctors who euthanise those with terminal illness. Both believe they are ending lives for a good cause, for a greater good. But humans rarely have pure intentions. I dont like having people in society desensitised to ending one’s life. Like everyone else, I d like to see less murder.
So everything the state has the lawful authority to do, is morally right by Christian/Catholic standards? I would bring up a certain legal, socially accepted thing condemned by Catholicism but then I wouldnt want to scare you.
I never said I was a particularly merciful person and I dont speak for others. One could say that not having the death penalty is merciful in the long term, for the souls of those involved in the process.
You have no more right than me todeclare that Im wrong when I express a view. I can only ask, do you have solid facts that the greatest chance of one to repent is through knowledge of impending death? Have you done a survey, or been on death row? Can you read minds? You are not God and thus cannot make your claim with certainty. I cant read criminals minds either so here is what I think- when one knows they have so little time to repent, then they might do so out of desperation and fear. In this case their ultimate motive is an egoistic one, because they are desperate to save their soul. They are not repenting out of love of God or able to get a true understanding of what they did and repent in a complete way, which they have the right to as it is all too easy to make mistakes in life. Who knows what may happen if they are given this chance? The loved ones of murder victims have been known to get comfort from being able to speak with the murderers.
E
Ender
Guest
Deterrence is a secondary objective of punishment.
Protection is a secondary objective of punishment.
The state has the duty to punish the guilty; that the state is composed of imperfect individuals does not alter that obligation.
St. Paul expressed a different opinion.
for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing (Rom 13:4)
The Church has always interpreted this verse to mean that the state has the moral authority to apply capital punishment.
Repentance is a secondary objective of punishment.
Of the four objectives of punishment you have identified all three of the secondary ones; the one you didn’t mention is the primary objective which is retribution - that is, justice. I understand your personal feelings about the death penalty but they do not coincide with what the Church teaches about it.
Ender
J
JaneGrey
Guest
Iam not familiar about these mysterious ‘‘objectives of punishment’’ (if they are something in Catholic faith kindly let me know what exactly and I apologise) you keep mentioning, but even if I did it doesnt exactly invalidate my argument.
Iam not just focused on the punishment here. I guess you could say that Im confident God will punish unrepentant criminals in His own way when they eventually die. Im not sure if you really read my post but Im concerned with how capital punishment affects others involved in the process, not just the one being put to death. You can have three very good reasons to have capital punishment but for some reason I always come back to thinking that there are more reasons objectively why it is better to not sentence people to death. As others have said on this thread, even if I was Catholic I would not be going against the faith to be personally against the death penalty. It has its disadvantages and no one should ignore them.
Like I said before, I waver sometimes in my weaker moments and feel that the death penalty somehow brings justice. Then I realise that this is just an emotional reaction of mine. The majority of the time I dont see the link between sentencing people to death and justice. Why does justice have to mean people playing God and ending a life? Justice can be so much more. Where does justice end and revenge begin?
E
Ender
Guest
Code:
*The purposes of criminal punishment are rather unanimously delineated in the Catholic tradition. Punishment is held to have a variety of ends that may conveniently be reduced to the following four: rehabilitation, defense against the criminal, deterrence, and retribution. *(Cardinal Avery Dulles - 2001)You mentioned rehabilitation, defense, and deterrence but not retribution which as the Catechism explains is the primary purpose.
Code:
*"Since therefore the safeguarding of justice is necessary for salvation, it follows that it is necessary for salvation to restore what has been taken unjustly.**Legitimate public authority has the right and duty to inflict penalties commensurate with the gravity of the crime. *(CCC 2266)
The state has not just the right to punish criminals but it has the positive obligation to do so and the punishment must be commensurate with the gravity of the crime. This is not optional.
This is true and was probably JPII’s opinion as well that - at least in today’s society - execution does more harm than good. I don’t share that opinion.
It is not a question of revenge, nor is it a question of playing God; the Church has always recognized the state’s authority to apply capital punishment and duty to exact punishment, but you are on to the right question: does the death penalty bring justice?
There can be no question that the execution of (some) criminals is a just punishment. If that were not so then the Church would not have supported it in any situation; it would in fact be intrinsically evil and that is clearly not the case. The question today is does the death penalty alone satisfy justice - and I think this is so. As I have said before, the Church still holds to the truth of God’s command to Noah that those who murder should be put to death. This is not my interpretation, it is the Church’s.
Ender
S
severus68
Guest
Could you please quote the text of the RCC Cathechism which states that retribution is the primary purpose of capitital punishment today for the Church. I do know that the Cathechism does state that today circumstances warranting the death penalty are practically non existent or to that effect. My apologies if any of that is incorrect.
It is true that the Church does not say directly that it is wrong to support the death penalty but if I paraphrased correctly, what circumstances would justify the death penalty with the support of the Church.
E
Ender
Guest
The primary purpose of all criminal punishment is retribution; that is what is meant by “redressing the disorder.” That is in CCC 2266 as I cited earlier. Given Cardinal Dulles’ explanation of the four purposes of punishment it seems fairly clear that neither rehabilitation, deterrence, nor defense fulfill that purpose.
You are correct; that is what is said in 2267.
If you take 2267 as the most important statement the Church has made on capital punishment then the circumstances justifying the death penalty are essentially non-existent. In the long line of statements that the Church has made over the centuries about punishment, justice, expiation, mercy, etc however, it is 2267 that is the anomaly. I cannot find any way to get from what the Church had consistently said for nearly 2000 years to what JPII wrote in 1995. I especially cannot rationalize the new restriction on executions given that the Church still refers to Gen 9:6 as an eternal teaching - and that is the passage where God commands that those who murder should be put to death. That verse was directly referenced in the Catechism of Trent (which was the Church’s catechism for over 300 years) and formed the basis for their support of capital punishment.
It appears that, unlike everything else in the new Catechism, section 2267 contains a prudential opinion. It is not doctrine and is therefore not binding on Catholics to accept it.
Ender
- Status