Death penalty

  • Thread starter Thread starter seekingtruth64
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

seekingtruth64

Guest
What is your view?

I have been disturbed by the amount of Catholics I have met who are pro-life but also pro death penalty! If this is your view how do you justify it biblically?
 
seekingtruth64 said:
What is your view?

I have been disturbed by the amount of Catholics I have met who are pro-life but also pro death penalty! If this is your view how do you justify it biblically?
Click to expand...
Personally, I find it oxymoronic to say pro-life and pro-death-penalty, since to be pro-life means that you believe every person has the right to life, though some claim that by the actions of the people, they forfeit their right, which is debatable. Personally, I think the death penalty should rarely be, if ever, used.
 
I’m prolife.

As far as the death penalty goes…
Society has the right to defend itself and live without fear of a murderer. The ONLY time I think it should be used is if you are in a country that cannot legitimatley ensure the safeguard of a dangerous prisoner (for instance an extremely poor country or if the prisoner has high influence to be too dangerous to be held captive).

As an example, I think you could argue that someone I would understand executing would be Saddam Hussein…extremely dangerous, holding a large dangerous following, jailed in a country that had reason to worry about a jail break/hosttage situation/culture torn in two about the man.

Michael
 
bzkoss236 said:
Personally, I find it oxymoronic to say pro-life and pro-death-penalty, since to be pro-life means that you believe every person has the right to life, though some claim that by the actions of the people, they forfeit their right, which is debatable. Personally, I think the death penalty should rarely be, if ever, used.
Click to expand...
I agree that it is oxymoronic- I should have clarified that I’m meaning people who claim to be pro-life on the issue of abortion but are not pro-life when it comes to the death penalty.
 
seekingtruth64 said:
What is your view?

I have been disturbed by the amount of Catholics I have met who are pro-life but also pro death penalty! If this is your view how do you justify it biblically?
Click to expand...
I am fully pro life. But I think the distinction is an innocent life versus an evil and dangerous life.

A man beats, rapes and kills someone. I fail to see the question frankly. I tend to view letting him live as a travesty of justice. I focus on the victim of the crime. And I think a big part of it comes from so many of us living somewhere good where we truly don’t see much evil. When you someday come face to face with evil it is then you understand.

Biblical reasons… most of the OT plus the fact that when at the last supper Christ asked for swords Peter says “I got two right here” …

And I am somewhat puzzled myself how the Church came around to no death penalty when historically it seemed quite ok with it.
 
If I’m correct, I think the Church teaches that the death penalty can be used if there are no other safe options. It is important to note that the death penalty shouldn’t be used for convenience.
 
CCC 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, non-lethal 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 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.”
 
A baby has not done anything wrong, a grown-mentally-capable adults if, found guilty, have done something wrong and if they do something on a massive level; and without a shadow of a doubt are found guilty, then capital punishment may be justly used.
 
I am one of those people. Abortion is particularly heinous because the fetus is an absolutely defensless human being. Those who practice abortion for the most part are very selfish people. They deny the fetus life in order to escape the consequenses of their actions. They either do not want the inconvenience and cost of raising a human being, or they are afraid of the consequences, for various reasons, (none of which are legitimate) of bearing a child.
The death penalty should be for serious crimes, such as planned murder, murder for hire, or causing the death of a law enforcement officer in the act of performing his duty, It should also be for treason and for members of the military who desert in time of war, and for military cowardice in the face of the enemy when at war. Personally, I would add one other crime to these: the crime of sexually molesting a pre-pubescent child.
The death penalty should only be assigned to a perpetrator of these crimes after a proper trial by jury, and should be done in a timely manner. The current US practice of allowing unceasing appeals for the slightest legal pretext and executing a convict 20 plus years after he has been convicted does nothing by engender contempt for the judicial system…especially when the lawyers on both sides are paid by the taxpayer!
What most anti-death penalty people refuse to recognize, is that there are many murderers out there who are not mentally deficient or mentally disabled. They are simply and purely evil, and are beyond any chance of rehabilitation. Jeffrey Dahmer, Dean Coril, Wesley Allen Dodd, and Derrick Todd Lee are good examples of mass murderers who should have been put to death.
Sentanceing evil people like these to life without parole is nonsence, because in many prisons these convicts for the most part are not required to perform any useful (or non-useful) work of any kind and enjoy creature comforts such as books, magazines and other reading matter, TV in many cases and occassional movies. When you combine this with comprehensive medical care and three hot meals a day, many of these people enjoy a higher standard of living than they had before incarceration! All at a cost of several hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to the taxpayer!
The really bad thing about this is that 40 or 50 years later when everyone connected to the original crime is dead, has forgotten the heinous nature of the act, and is not around to complain, the murderer is freed on “compassionate” grounds. The thinking being that the miscreant is too old to harm anyone, To this I give a resounding “Bah Humbug” !!!
 
MichaelHowling said:
I’m prolife.

As far as the death penalty goes…
Society has the right to defend itself and live without fear of a murderer. The ONLY time I think it should be used is if you are in a country that cannot legitimatley ensure the safeguard of a dangerous prisoner (for instance an extremely poor country or if the prisoner has high influence to be too dangerous to be held captive).

As an example, I think you could argue that someone I would understand executing would be Saddam Hussein…extremely dangerous, holding a large dangerous following, jailed in a country that had reason to worry about a jail break/hosttage situation/culture torn in two about the man.

Michael
Click to expand...
This is pretty much my opinion as well. And from what I understand, how the Church sees the death penalty as well (as the CCC says in Augusta1990’s post before me). In today’s American society, one must wonder how often execution is the only way to protect members of society . . . 🤷
 
George_Stegmeir said:
I am one of those people. Abortion is particularly heinous because the fetus is an absolutely defensless human being. Those who practice abortion for the most part are very selfish people. They deny the fetus life in order to escape the consequenses of their actions. They either do not want the inconvenience and cost of raising a human being, or they are afraid of the consequences, for various reasons, (none of which are legitimate) of bearing a child.
The death penalty should be for serious crimes, such as planned murder, murder for hire, or causing the death of a law enforcement officer in the act of performing his duty, It should also be for treason and for members of the military who desert in time of war, and for military cowardice in the face of the enemy when at war. Personally, I would add one other crime to these: the crime of sexually molesting a pre-pubescent child.
The death penalty should only be assigned to a perpetrator of these crimes after a proper trial by jury, and should be done in a timely manner. The current US practice of allowing unceasing appeals for the slightest legal pretext and executing a convict 20 plus years after he has been convicted does nothing by engender contempt for the judicial system…especially when the lawyers on both sides are paid by the taxpayer!
What most anti-death penalty people refuse to recognize, is that there are many murderers out there who are not mentally deficient or mentally disabled. They are simply and purely evil, and are beyond any chance of rehabilitation. Jeffrey Dahmer, Dean Coril, Wesley Allen Dodd, and Derrick Todd Lee are good examples of mass murderers who should have been put to death.
Sentanceing evil people like these to life without parole is nonsence, because in many prisons these convicts for the most part are not required to perform any useful (or non-useful) work of any kind and enjoy creature comforts such as books, magazines and other reading matter, TV in many cases and occassional movies. When you combine this with comprehensive medical care and three hot meals a day, many of these people enjoy a higher standard of living than they had before incarceration! All at a cost of several hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to the taxpayer!
The really bad thing about this is that 40 or 50 years later when everyone connected to the original crime is dead, has forgotten the heinous nature of the act, and is not around to complain, the murderer is freed on “compassionate” grounds. The thinking being that the miscreant is too old to harm anyone, To this I give a resounding “Bah Humbug” !!!
Click to expand...
I don’t know about the guys you mentioned, but wouldn’t it be possible for the people you mentioned to be sentenced for life.

BTW, if dangerous convicts have creature comforts that give them a higher standard of life than before, then the fact that they aren’t given the death penalty isn’t the problem. The problem is the luxuries that they are getting. It’s like if a mom grounds her son but puts the tv and the video games in his room so he can play games, then the problem isn’t that she grounded her son. The problem is that he is getting access to things that aren’t going to punish him.

One last point, I thought Jesus said we couldn’t judge if a person was evil or not. We can only judge the action.
 
Yes, abortion is an issue of death of an innocent party.

But the death penalty is not necessarily about the death of a guilty and/or evil party.

If your standard for imposing the death penalty is that the person is found guilty by a jury, then you will be murdering a lot of innocent people! Juries are not infallible. Mistakes are made from time to time, and once you have taken a life you can’t give it back. How many verdicts have been overturned after people have been wrongly convicted? Imagine if all those people had been murdered.

I feel like if we are deciding someone deserves death and killing them, we are making a judgement that should only be made by God.

If a person guilty of a heinous crime can be jailed and kept from harming another human ever again, there is no justification for killing them, other than to seek revenge…and I don’t believe revenge is a biblical value.

And George Steigmer, how can you put military deserters and treason on the same level as paedophiles and murderers? If you committed treason against Saddam Hussein would you deserve death? And why the death penalty only for those who molest pre pubescent children? Is the crime somehow less heinous to rape an innocent who happens to be a teenager?
 
bitznbitez said:
A man beats, rapes and kills someone. I fail to see the question frankly. I tend to view letting him live as a travesty of justice. I focus on the victim of the crime. And I think a big part of it comes from so many of us living somewhere good where we truly don’t see much evil. When you someday come face to face with evil it is then you understand.
Click to expand...
There are some who would say that death is too easy of a punishment.
 
The “pro life” term was, originally, identified with the anti abortion movement, which still seems the most appropriate context.

In the context of the facts, yes, of course you can be pro life and pro death penalty. There is no contradiction.

Based upon biblical and theological teachings, one can, reasonably and responsibly, find that an anti death penalty view is not pro life. See below.

All sanctions are given because we value what is being taken away.

Whether it be fines, freedom or lives, in every case we take things away, as legal sanction, it is because we value that which is taken away.

How can it be a sanction, if we do not value that which is taken
away? It can’t.

In addition, more innocent lives are saved when we use the death penalty, thereby a pro life benefit. See below.

There is the well known Genesis passage, reviewed below, wherein the death penalty is based upon life being sacred. Genesis is for all peoples and all times.

In addition, there is Numbers 35:31 which states that there can be no reduction in sentence for murder, that the murderer must be executed. All other crimes are subject to reduced sentences.

The good thief on the cross stated the two thieves were being justly executed for their crimes. Jesus did not reply “you should not be executed”. His reply was that the good thief would attain eternal salvation. The concern seems not the manner of our earthly deaths, but our state of redemption and salvation at the time of our deaths - the concern for eternal life.

The moral and religious arguments, in support of the death penalty, all have a foundation in respecting innocent life, therefore, when it is wrongly taken away, the highest form of sanction is provided.

As in:

Genesis 9:5-6: “For your lifeblood I will surely require a reckoning… Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for God made man in his own image.”

Chapter V:The Sanctity of Life, “Principles of Conduct: Aspects of Biblical Ethics” By John Murray, 1991 (first published 1957) by Wm. B. Eerdmans
tiny.cc/4SFBY

“Death Penalty Support: Christian and secular Scholars”
prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/07/death-penalty-support-modern-catholic.html

Christianity and the death penalty
prodeathpenalty.com/DP.html#F.Christianity

Catholic and other Christian References: Support for the Death Penalty,
homicidesurvivors.com/2006/10/12/catholic-and-other-christian-references-support-for-the-death-penalty.aspx

“Killing Equals Killing: The Amoral Confusion of Death Penalty Opponents”
homicidesurvivors.com/2009/02/01/murder-and-execution–very-distinct-moral-differences–new-mexico.aspx

“The Death Penalty: Neither Hatred nor Revenge”
homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/20/the-death-penalty-neither-hatred-nor-revenge.aspx

“The Death Penalty: Not a Human Rights Violation”
homicidesurvivors.com/2006/03/20/the-death-penalty-not-a-human-rights-violation.aspx

THE DEATH PENALTY: SAVING MORE INNOCENT LIVES

Of all endeavors that put innocents at risk, is there one with a better record of sparing innocent lives than the US death penalty? Unlikely.

In three ways, innocents are more protected with the death penalty, than with lesser sanctions.

Another pro life consideration.
  1. The Death Penalty: Saving More Innocent Lives
    prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/03/death-penalty-saving-more-innocent.html
  2. Innocents More At Risk Without Death Penalty
    prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/03/innocents-more-at-risk-without-death.html
  3. LIFE: MUCH PREFERRED OVER EXECUTION
    99.7% of murderers tell us “Give me life, not execution”
    prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/11/life-much-preferred-over-execution.html
 
seekingtruth64 said:
If your standard for imposing the death penalty is that the person is found guilty by a jury, then you will be murdering a lot of innocent people! Juries are not infallible. Mistakes are made from time to time, and once you have taken a life you can’t give it back. How many verdicts have been overturned after people have been wrongly convicted?
Click to expand...
  1. The Death Penalty: Saving More Innocent Lives
    prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/03/death-penalty-saving-more-innocent.html
  2. Innocents More At Risk Without Death Penalty
    prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/03/innocents-more-at-risk-without-death.html
 
seekingtruth64 said:
What is your view?

I have been disturbed by the amount of Catholics I have met who are pro-life but also pro death penalty! If this is your view how do you justify it biblically?
Click to expand...
There is a solid case that it is more disturbing that more Cathoics do not support the death penalty.

The New Testament death penalty support is overwhelming.

There is a 2000 year record of Catholic Saints, Popes, Doctors of the Church, religious leaders, biblical scholars and theologians speaking in favor of the death penalty, a record of scholarship, in breadth and depth, which overwhelms any position to the contrary.

The very recent changes (EV,1995 & CCC, final amendment 2003) in the Catholic position are based upon a wrongly considered prudential judgement which finds that “defense of society”, a utilitarian/secular concern, not a moral or theological one, very rarely, if ever, requires execution.

This change in teaching is based upon the Church’s switch to utilitarianism - defense of society - when the teachings have been and must be based upon justice, biblical and theological teachings and tradition - all of which conflict with the newest teachings based upon utility – as utility and justice may, often, have conflicts.

In addition, the evidence is overwhelming that execution offers greater defense of society than does a life sentence. Dead unjust aggressors are infinitely less likely to harm and murder, again than are living unjust aggressors.

Living unjust aggressors murder and harm in prison, after escape and after improper release. The cases are well known and are daily occurrences.

It is a mystery why the Church chose a utilitarian/secular prudential judgement over eternal teachings based upon justice and chose to spare more murderers at the cost of more innocent deaths, but that is, precisely what She has done.

It is also a mystery why the Church didn’t review the available evidence, that execution offers a greater defense of society. There is no evidence that She did.

Thankfully, as the recent Church’s teaching is a prudential judgement, such means that any Catholic can support more executions and remain a Catholic in good standing.

===================================

God/Jesus: ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and ‘Whoever curses father or mother must certainly be put to death.’ Matthew 15:4 NAB. This is a frequent passage which God used in the OT, which, as was Jesus’ custom, He brought into the NT for emphasis of continuity and importance.
full context www.usccb.org/nab/bible/matthew/matthew15.htm

Pope Pius XII: “When it is a question of the execution of a man condemned to death it is then reserved to the public power to deprive the condemned of the benefit of life, in expiation of his fault, when already, by his fault, he has dispossessed himself of the right to live.” 9/14/52.

Pope (and Saint) Pius V, “The just use of (executions), far from involving the crime of murder, is an act of paramount obedience to this (Fifth) Commandment which prohibits murder.” “The Roman Catechism of the Council of Trent” (1566).

All interpretations, contrary to the biblical support of capital punishment, are false. Interpreters ought to listen to the Bible’s own agenda, rather than to squeeze from it implications for their own agenda. As the ancient rabbis taught, “Do not seek to be more righteous than your Creator.” (Ecclesiastes Rabbah 7.33.). Part of Synopsis of Professor Lloyd R. Bailey’s book Capital Punishment: What the Bible Says, Abingdon Press, 1987.

========
The current Catechism confirms within CCC 2260: “For your lifeblood I will surely require a reckoning… Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for God made man in his own image.”

“This teaching remains necessary for all time.”

Jesus: Now one of the criminals hanging there reviled Jesus, saying, “Are you not the Messiah? Save yourself and us.” The other, however, rebuking him, said in reply, “Have you no fear of God, for you are subject to the same condemnation? And indeed, we have been condemned justly, for the sentence we received corresponds to our crimes, but this man has done nothing criminal.” Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” (Jesus) replied to him, “Amen, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.” Luke 23: 39-43

It is not the nature of our deaths, but the state of salvation at the time of death which is most important.
 
George_Stegmeir said:
I am one of those people. Abortion is particularly heinous because the fetus is an absolutely defensless human being. Those who practice abortion for the most part are very selfish people. They deny the fetus life in order to escape the consequenses of their actions. They either do not want the inconvenience and cost of raising a human being, or they are afraid of the consequences, for various reasons, (none of which are legitimate) of bearing a child.
The death penalty should be for serious crimes, such as planned murder, murder for hire, or causing the death of a law enforcement officer in the act of performing his duty, It should also be for treason and for members of the military who desert in time of war, and for military cowardice in the face of the enemy when at war. Personally, I would add one other crime to these: the crime of sexually molesting a pre-pubescent child.
The death penalty should only be assigned to a perpetrator of these crimes after a proper trial by jury, and should be done in a timely manner. The current US practice of allowing unceasing appeals for the slightest legal pretext and executing a convict 20 plus years after he has been convicted does nothing by engender contempt for the judicial system…especially when the lawyers on both sides are paid by the taxpayer!
What most anti-death penalty people refuse to recognize, is that there are many murderers out there who are not mentally deficient or mentally disabled. They are simply and purely evil, and are beyond any chance of rehabilitation. Jeffrey Dahmer, Dean Coril, Wesley Allen Dodd, and Derrick Todd Lee are good examples of mass murderers who should have been put to death.
Sentanceing evil people like these to life without parole is nonsence, because in many prisons these convicts for the most part are not required to perform any useful (or non-useful) work of any kind and enjoy creature comforts such as books, magazines and other reading matter, TV in many cases and occassional movies. When you combine this with comprehensive medical care and three hot meals a day, many of these people enjoy a higher standard of living than they had before incarceration! All at a cost of several hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to the taxpayer!
The really bad thing about this is that 40 or 50 years later when everyone connected to the original crime is dead, has forgotten the heinous nature of the act, and is not around to complain, the murderer is freed on “compassionate” grounds. The thinking being that the miscreant is too old to harm anyone, To this I give a resounding “Bah Humbug” !!!
Click to expand...
Derrick Todd Lee was executed. I don’t know if you know this or not, but the way you said it makes it seem like they “should be” but “were not.” Here in LA we also have someone scheduled to die Ash Wednesday.
 
MichaelHowling said:
I’m prolife.

As far as the death penalty goes…
Society has the right to defend itself and live without fear of a murderer. The ONLY time I think it should be used is if you are in a country that cannot legitimatley ensure the safeguard of a dangerous prisoner (for instance an extremely poor country or if the prisoner has high influence to be too dangerous to be held captive).

As an example, I think you could argue that someone I would understand executing would be Saddam Hussein…extremely dangerous, holding a large dangerous following, jailed in a country that had reason to worry about a jail break/hosttage situation/culture torn in two about the man.

Michael
Click to expand...
Someone in a poor county gets hung and someone in a rich country doesn’t. Seriously?
 
Shannon9791 said:
Derrick Todd Lee was executed. I don’t know if you know this or not, but the way you said it makes it seem like they “should be” but “were not.” Here in LA we also have someone scheduled to die Ash Wednesday.
Click to expand...
and Dean Corll was killed by one of his serial killer buddies.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top