Death Penalty

[BryanW]

Reply to pnewton…

New York State has a prisoner that a special cell was built for (2 actually) and special procedures where developed to handle. If NY tax payers knew how much it cost to keep him this way they would all start yelling death penalty I’m sure.

I’m not saying it’s possible to keep every Inmate this way but where there is a need it’s possible.

Prisons are understaffed because of tax cuts this puts Officers at risk. One of NY’s prisons was built after the American Revolution. Sing Sing prison was condemned and was suppose to close but never has. Why? Money. The best answer to some is the death penalty.

15 years as a Correctional Officer and less than that trying to live my Faith has taught me the only difference from myself an Inmates is … “But for the grace of God there go I.”

 

[ridesawhitehors]

SIZE=3]**UNDECIDED, UNSURE. **

 

[jimmy]

I agree, it is not up to us to decide when a persons time is up.

A life sentence with no possability of parole is a good thing though.

 

[Steven_Merten]

Stylteralmaldo:

I think I might be of a minority opinion here, but we’ll see…

I am against the death penalty in this country because we live in a civilized society and we do not have the right to determine God’s will and make the determination when someone’s time is up.

So once you find out that God has determined that a man’s time is up when he murders, and God wills you to kill the murderer, then you will obey God and kill the murderer?

**NAB GEN 9:6 **

"If anyone sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; For in the image of God has man been made." I invite you to visit Throwing Stones which studies Jesus’ will on when to kill to protect the innocent.

Peace in Christ,
Steven Merten
www.ILOVEYOUGOD.com

 

[Christy_Beth]

Let me put another spin on this. In “Dead man walking” Sr. Helen Prejean wrote about what she found out about the death penalty after agreeing to be a “spiritual director” to two men on death row in Louisiana. ONe thing she pointed out was that only poor people got the death penalty. Rich people never do, despite what their crime is.

Basically, a rich person can kill ten people and not get the death penalty. A poor person, on the other hand, can kill only one, but is almost guaranteed to get the death penalty. Why? Becuase of the way our system works. Those who have to rely on a court appointed attorney are all but guaranteed a much harsher sentence than a rich person who can afford a battery of of big name attorneys. And investigators, etc.

Now, think back to four years ago to that election season. There was a man on death row in Texas. Two people put him at the scene of a murder, and his gun was *SIMILAR *to the one used in the crime. But five witnesses said it wasn’t him, and bullistic evidence showed that is wasn’t his gun that was used in the crime. But he was put to death for that murder anyway. Bush was govenor of Texas at that time, as far as he was concerned, if the man was convicted, that meant he was guilty. Oh, really.

 

[Greenscapular]

I voted " Yes - However, it should only be used in extreme cases: Like terrorists/T. McVeigh ", However, I have re-thought it. I’m just unsure, but I think slant against the Death Penalty.

 

[BenRosa]

Originally, I wasn’t for the death penalty. I’ve changed my mind recently. If our law states (generally speaking) that if an individual commits a murder (1st degree), is caught and proven guilty in court, then they must forfit their life. Now if an individual, knowing this law, commits a murder, who chose the risk of being executed if caught? The law was there, the individual weighed the risk, and broke this law anyway (I’m speaking here of calculated crimes, not crimes of passion).

This is not vengence, this is going through with a stated outcome as know to all. It is hoped that in those cases where an individual is entertaining the idea of whacking someone for some kind of gain, that the possibility of forefitting their very life if caught, will deter this awful crime from ever occurring. Unfortunetly, we need this kind of harsh boundry to keep those calculating and scheming individuals who do value theirs lives, in check.

We all lock our doors at night, why?

 

[Steven_Merten]

Jesus gave Apostolic Successors the power to call upon Him to “hold sins bound” in heaven. There is no way to go to heaven if Jesus holds you bound to your sin in heaven.

Please visit Throwing Stones

We have been dealing with the question on whether Church Excommunication is the Church’s use of the power to have Jesus bind sins in heaven. We have come to the point where it appears they do but they, as a rule, put a clause in the stament giving back Jesus the power to make the ultimate decision. The clause seems to defeat the whole purpose of Jesus sworn oath in the Holy Spirit that He will do what Successors call upon Him to do in regard to “holding sins bound”. Here is the link to this thread. forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=8628

Having the power to have Jesus hold a man bound to his sins in heaven is a far more deadly, infinitely more deadly, weapon than the use of physical capital punishment. It seems that if Jesus authorizes the use of such a Spiritually deadly weapon to Apostolic Succesors for the protetion of His Bride the Church, then He would also favor countries using physical capital punishment, which is far less deadly, to protect their people.

Peace in Christ,
Steven Merten
www.ILOVEYOUGOD.com

New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia "anathema"

Fourth Council of Toledo against those who were guilty of the crime of high treason: "He who dares to despise our decision, let him be stricken with anathema maranatha, i.e. may he be damned at the coming of the Lord, may he have his place with Judas Iscariot, he and his companions. Amen." There is frequent mention of this anathema maranatha in the Bulls of erection for abbeys and other establishments. Still the anathema maranatha is a censure from which the criminal may be absolved; although he is delivered to Satan and his angels, the Church, in virtue of the Power of the Keys, can receive him once more into the communion of the faithful. More than that, it is with this purpose in view that she takes such rigorous measures against him, in order that by the mortification of his body his soul may be saved on the last day. The Church, animated by the spirit of God, does not wish the death of the sinner, but rather that he be converted and live. **This explains why the most severe and terrifying formulas of excommunication, containing all the rigours of the Maranatha have, as a rule, clauses like this: Unless he becomes repentant, or gives satisfaction, or is corrected. **

Quoted from New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia “anathema”
newadvent.org/cathen/01455e.htm

 

[ATeNumquam]

Teresa9:

I live in the Uk we do not have a death penalty for exactly those reasons, because it is not humane to kill and because we may have the wrong man/woman!! God Bless you xxx

Ditto from one who lives in New Zealand. We did away with it in the 1950s, I think.
I shouldn’t criticise another country’s policies, I suppose, but it astounds me that a civilised country like the USA (or some States, I should say) still has capital punishment.

 

[chemcatholic]

BenRosa:

This is not vengence, this is going through with a stated outcome as know to all. It is hoped that in those cases where an individual is entertaining the idea of whacking someone for some kind of gain, that the possibility of forefitting their very life if caught, will deter this awful crime from ever occurring. Unfortunetly, we need this kind of harsh boundry to keep those calculating and scheming individuals who do value theirs lives, in check.

Remember earlier in the thread when someone said that some inmates on deathrow have stopped their appeals process so they can ‘hurry up and die?’ It seems to me that for someone with a blatant disregard for life would have more to fear from life in prison with no possiblity of parole than from death.

Peace

 

[Brendan]

Detroit Sue:

. I vote against anything that tries to get the death penalty in Michigan, and I regularly pray in front abortuaries and participate in pro-Life activities…

I’ll agree with Sue. As a Catholic, I can’t say capitial punishment is always wrong. That would go against Church teaching.

But I am immensly pround that Michigan was the first English speaking government in the world to outlaw capital punishment.

A little bit of triva, as far a Timothy McVeigh is concerned, he probably went straight to Heaven.

He made a confession, recieved absolution and, as part of Last Rights, recieved the Apostolic Blessing, which carries a plenary indulgence.

 

[BenRosa]

chemcatholic:

Remember earlier in the thread when someone said that some inmates on deathrow have stopped their appeals process so they can ‘hurry up and die?’ It seems to me that for someone with a blatant disregard for life would have more to fear from life in prison with no possiblity of parole than from death.

Those that have a blatant disregard for life, even their own, are mental/spiritually ill. I don’t suppose executing them would be correct. Their crimes may not even be pre-meditated. I’m speaking of those evil ones who scheme for the purpose of gaining material wealth, freedom from a marriage, etc., hoping to get away with it and live a “peaceful” life. They should forfit their lives because they value the life they have so much, they were willing to take someone elses.

 

[chemcatholic]

BenRosa:

Those that have a blatant disregard for life, even their own, are mental/spiritually ill. I don’t suppose executing them would be correct. Their crimes may not even be pre-meditated. I’m speaking of those evil ones who scheme for the purpose of gaining material wealth, freedom from a marriage, etc., hoping to get away with it and live a “peaceful” life. They should forfit their lives because they value the life they have so much, they were willing to take someone elses.

Even in the case you present, what would be a worse punishment for such a criminal - death and ‘freedom’ * from life, or life imprisonment with forced labor, no luxuries (cable, etc.), and absolutely no possiblity of parole? I think the latter would be worse, since they would have the rest of their life to live in misery.

Peace

*I use the term freedom on the assumption that murderers don’t believe in or care about an afterlife.

 

[BenRosa]

chemcatholic:

Even in the case you present, what would be a worse punishment for such a criminal - death and ‘freedom’ * from life, or life imprisonment…

Hello ChemCatholic…

Whether the convicted murderer dies in prision or is executed, if he or she does not reconcile themselves with our Father…there will be no punishment mankind can impose that will come close to an eternity with out the love of our Father.

 

[tru_dvotion]

I propose EXAMPLE C:

(1) Murderer kills.
(2) Somebody is caught and convicted of the crime.
(3) He is executed.
(4) 25 years after the killings new evidence and new technology proves an innocent man was executed.

This happened to several innocent people in Canada until we had the death penalty out ruled. Fortunately we no longer have the death penalty in Canada. (We are nice) In the past few years there have been a dozen or so individuals, who were freed from serving their life sentences. New evidence and new technology and reexamination of their case proved they were wrongfully convicted. There is one such highly publicized case before the courts at the moment. More than likely, the man will be exonerated and set free. Praise God!

 

[BenRosa]

Example C is the strongest case against the death penalty, in my humble opinion. Just like the Catholic Church, the judicial system is made-up of fallible people, trying (I believe in most cases) to determine the truth based on the facts presented at the time. The new technology mentioned in example C, DNA I’m supposing, was not around until fairly recently.

However, it does make one wonder how many poor suspects were convicted because they could not afford the best representation for their case, when in reality, they were innocent. This is quite troubling, no doubt.

All we can do in these situations is put our faith in our Father…and His will, that all will, in the end, bear good fruit. Remember, the death of an innocent man is not the end of life, only life in this world. A reward greater than anything we can currently imagine awaits those who are in favor with the Father.

 

[tru_dvotion]

Our native population is overly represented in Canadian jails. The only reason for that is, as the previous poster said, poor representation. Legal aid is not terribly lucrative, and the marginalized gets marginalized once again by our legal system.

Unfortunately, DNA evidence can be tempered with as well. While the new technology can aid justice, it can provide novel solutions to the criminal mind, and manipulation of DNA evidence and framing innocent people with DNA evidence is going to be the next step. Life is stranger than fiction, and so we could never become complacent in the pursuit of truth and the death penalty is unfortunately so final an outcome, that when truth is obscured or cannot be arrived in due time, grave injustices can occur. Yes, hopefully, the wrongly convicted and the innocently executed will enjoy God’s grace in the next life, but how utterly devastating it is for their families having to watch their loved ones cut off from this life so unfairly! The families generally know, if their kin is innocent or not.

 

[pnewton]

I have never know, met or dealt with anyone unfairly sentenced to death. Is this a real problem in Canada?Maybe it is a good idea that you did dispense with it.

 

[tru_dvotion]

I have never know, met or dealt with anyone unfairly sentenced to death. Is this a real problem in Canada?Maybe it is a good idea that you did dispense with it.

Not anymore, since we have no death penalty for thirty and some years now.

But as long as there are states in the USA or anywhere else in the world, where the death penalty is legal, those places most definitely do have a problem with putting innocent people to death. Most certainly, no nation on this Earth has a pure and spotless record dishing out justice.

 

[pnewton]

tru_dvotion:

But as long as there are states in the USA or anywhere else in the world, where the death penalty is legal, those places most definitely do have a problem with putting innocent people to death. Most certainly, no nation on this Earth has a pure and spotless record dishing out justice.

Yes, but once again can you (are anyone) give a specific. (non-Canadian)