Is The Catholic Church against the death penalty?

[MarkThompson]

Sword Bro is correct - jails and prisons are very dangerous places. The actual Miranda (the dude who gave us Miranda Warnings - you have the right to remain silent…" ) was killed in a knife fight in the penitentiary.

No. Ernesto Miranda was killed in a knife fight in a bar.

 

[Thyme]

Capital punishment is blasphemy in my own opinion. If prisons can’t cope with prisoners, then they need improving.

 

[Warrenton]

Indeed? I had always thought it was in the pen. I stand corrected - much obliged. But jails and penitetiaries are dangerous. In my county in the past year an inmate made a knife, stabbed a deputy in the face, got his gun, and shot at a second deputy. Don’t recall if he hit him or not. But it was a near repeat of the disaster down in Georgia a few years back.

Not, of course, that this necessarily requires a death penalty. But it does seem that sometimes the danger of being an inmate is minimized. I don’t think very highly of their treatment in most of the USA. (Please - don’t go accusing me of wanting to coddle criminals). The loss of liberty and regimentation of life is the intended punishment. It should not be augmented by “extra legal” beating, killing, sexual battery, and gratuitous humiliation.

We ought not forget that our Lord was an inmate on a capital charge. As were Sts Peter and Paul. Christ commands us to relieve the plight of the imprisoned in Matt. 25:41. So on the one hand, the death penalty is validated by the need to protect other inmates, but on the other, it is most unjust to create or fail to fix degrading conditions, and use that failure as an excuse for excessive capital punishment.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

First, I am not happy with any form of, let’s call it homicide, that should be technically correct in all circumstances. When it comes to the military I would not accept carte blanche for military personnel using lethal force. If for some reason France invaded Belgium tomorrow then I would accept the right of the Belgians to defend themselves against the French meeting whatever force the French may be using with similar force. On the other hand I do not see the justification for what the UK, US and other countries are doing in Afghanistan and Iraq. I also accept the case where one has the right to defend oneself. And, I would do whatever it takes to protect my children.

The death penalty on the other hand is totally different. I think the situation in the US is very bad. People can spend years on death row as they fight the penalty and can spend many years not knowing whether they will be killed or not. There is also evidence that some of the methods used are not quick. I completely disagree with the death penalty but if it is going to be carried out it should be done as humanely as possible. In the UK if one was sentenced to death they were killed within weeks and hangmen, especially Albert Pierpoint, took care to make the hanging process as quick as possible.

I am very glad that we no longer have the death penalty in the UK. We got rid of the death penalty for murder in 1965 although a few other capital offences remained although no one was hung for them. It included things like high treason, arson against ships of the Royal Navy. Now some other European countries are having to abolish the death penalty, e.g. Turkey as it is a condition of membership of the European Union.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

I don’t think the death penalty is good but it is necessary for the safety of our society.

Could you please explain how the death penalty makes society safer.

 

[Thyme]

But if people are being attacked in prisons, then shouldn’t the problem be resolved, rather than thrown away? Doesn’t the UN oppose capital punishment?

 

[Matthew_Holford]

Capital punishment is blasphemy in my own opinion. If prisons can’t cope with prisoners, then they need improving.

I strongly agree with you on both these points.

While I would never claim UK prisons are wonderful places, they do not appear to be in the same league as US prisons in terms of how safe they are for inmates and those who work in them. May be US prison authorities need to look at how they run their prisons.

I am not even sure how the safety of prisons fits into a discussion on “U.S. Should execute more people?” unless some are advocating that we put to death all criminals.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

I think you have a right to an opinion on Afghanistan and Iraq even if Irish troops are not involved.

While I perhaps wouldn’t go as far as to call individual soldiers murderers as they are there under the orders of the governments and not out of personal choice. However, the situation in Afghanistan and Iraq wouldn’t, I don’t think, meet the just war principle.

Personally, I wouldn’t wish to get involved in a discussion as to the situation in North Ireland. I do not think any one of any nationality, political group, or religion can claim the moral high ground. All sides have committed atrocities. In my, probably naive hope, I wish all English, Irish, Scottish, and Welsh people could just get on together.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

Yes, just meant you can have an opinion on its justification. Of course, that can be kept personal. I am aware that too many American and British families have loved ones serving in these countries and many have suffered the grief of losing their loved ones in these conflicts.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

Yes, you would have thought history would have taught foreign forces to stay out of Afghanistan. Generally, I don’t think many politicians learn much from history.

I don’t think Iraq would have been invaded if it didn’t have substantial crude oil reserves.

I share your concerns about some of the comments raised to support the death penalty. Even rabid dogs are put down more humanely than humans on death row.

 

[MarkThompson]

Indeed? I had always thought it was in the pen. I stand corrected - much obliged.

Here’s a news report from two days later.

Maybe you were thinking of the fact that, after his confession was thrown out for lack of warnings, Miranda was retried and convicted again, serving over a decade in prison. But he was definitely killed at a bar after his release.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

I strongly agree with you on both these points.

While I would never claim UK prisons are wonderful places, they do not appear to be in the same league as US prisons in terms of how safe they are for inmates and those who work in them. May be US prison authorities need to look at how they run their prisons.

I am not even sure how the safety of prisons fits into a discussion on “U.S. Should execute more people?” unless some are advocating that we put to death all criminals.

The safety of prisions plays in this way as I see it…
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 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 non-existent.”
If the bolded section is not true, that is there are not “non-lethal means” that are “sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety” then the logic that uses those statements to construct the underlined portion is faulty and therefore voids that section.

Now I agree that this in no way means there should be more executions in the US. As I have said, while I support the States right to resort to capitial punishment, I am against the way that it has been implemented within the US.

 

[hosemonkey]

As I have posted before, I do not agree with the way that the death penalty is applied in this country. Reform is needed. However, it does accomplish at least one purpose, It removes one heinous criminal at a time, for good. This person will no longer be able to repeat his crime, he/she is no longer part of the problem. It costs too much to support these people on death row, where they are more than likely to die of old age. Fair trial, one appeal, execution. Or, maybe the bleeding hearts could Adopt-a-Prisoner and agree to pay for the cost of incarceration for their own felon, kinda like PETA’s Adopt-a-Turkey, to keep their adopted turkey from becoming Christmas dinner. How about it, want to put your money where your mouth is?

 

[Matthew_Holford]

The safety of prisions plays in this way as I see it…
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 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 non-existent.”
If the bolded section is not true, that is there are not “non-lethal means” that are “sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety” then the logic that uses those statements to construct the underlined portion is faulty and therefore voids that section.

Now I agree that this in no way means there should be more executions in the US. As I have said, while I support the States right to resort to capitial punishment, I am against the way that it has been implemented within the US.

I have a feeling that our wires may have got crossed here. The Thread is about whether there should be more executions in the US. Some posters have introduced into the discussion the point that prisons are not safe places for inmates and staff. There seems to be some implication in some of these posts that to some extent that inmates may actually be better off executed than have to suffer life in prison. The point I was hoping to make in my post which you have quoted is that not all prison inmates are in prison for capital offences. Therefore some inmates will have to contend with prison conditions and cannot be excuted (I hope all this makes some sense).

I understand that the Church seems to leave it to each individual to decide whether they agree with capital punishment or not. However, I find it difficult to accept that a religious brother would agree with the death penalty. Set a side what the CCC says because it’s my understanding that you have the right to make up your own mind. I really do struggle to understand how a religious could agree with the death penalty. I find all forms of homicide abhorrent. I will accept that sometimes it can be the lesser of two evils. For example, if someone was about to kill one of my children I would be justified in defending my child even if that defence resulted in the death of the person who was attempting to kill my child. I know that I would be greatly relieved that my child had not been killed. But, I believe that I would have a terrible burden of guilt for killing someone. Now, with the death penalty I do not see that fits into the concept of defence. It does not defend the person they have murdered. It might possibly defend people who could be that murderers next victim. But, life imprisonment would equally provide the same defence, providing that a life term is exactly that and that parole is not granted.

In what way do you disagree with the way capital punishment is exercised in the US?

 

[Matthew_Holford]

As I have posted before, I do not agree with the way that the death penalty is applied in this country.

In what way do you see the way the death penalty as applied in the US as wrong?

This person will no longer be able to repeat his crime, he/she is no longer part of the problem.

Wouldn’t life imprisonment, true life imprisonment, not a fixed term followed by parole, achieve the same end?

It costs too much to support these people on death row, where they are more than likely to die of old age.

Doesn’t the present system cost the State more? While all appeals and requests for clemency are taking place the State continues to have the financial burden of maintaining the prisoner in jail plus it has the additional costs that will be involved in what appears to me the very complex appeal process that follows the imposition of a death penalty in the US. Surely the cost of keeping an inmate in prison, even for the rest of their life, must cost the state less than keeping an inmate and the cost of all the judicial processes of attempting to get the death penalty reversed or commuted?

 

[hosemonkey]

Fair trial, one appeal, execution.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

In what way do you disagree with the way capital punishment is exercised in the US?

I believe that the way it is implemented in most places within the US is arbatrary and inequitable. Those who can afford their own lawyers seem to have a less of a chance of being charged with a captial crime than someone with a public defender.

It all came to a head for me with a case that happened when I lived in Rochester, New York. A local lawyer hired his wife’s brother from California to come to Rochester and kill her (yes to kill his sister). The man came and did the crime and was caught and it was connected to her husband. The out going district attorney (it was close to election time) decided to charge the brother (the murderer) with a captial crime. In most jurisdictions it is up to the DA to decide if he will go for a captial case and then needs the approval of the judge, if he choses not to seek a captial case then no judge is involved.

Then the election took place and the current DA was replaced (he was not running again but his replacement was the number 2 in the DA office and had the outgoing DA’s support) with a new DA who decided not to go for a captial case against the lawyer husband who contracted the killing of his own wife.

The brother was from out of state and had a public defender, the lawyer husband could afford his own lawyer and was also well known in the area.

That made me take a closer look at how the systems work in the US.

 

[mick321]

Sorry. No.

The death penalty should be abolished without exception. All those waiting execution should have their sentences commuted to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.

A convicted murderer in secure state custody is not a danger to any other person. Arguments that execution is required to protect the public, deter future murders, conserve public resources, are without merit.

The induced-death-for-profit industry is alive and well in the USA. The Catholic Church has a duty to consistently oppose it on every level, whatever form it takes. Capital punishment, abortion on demand, euthanasia and the armed invasion of other nations are vile and unjust practices on their face. The Church has no authority - moral or otherwise - to “allow” Catholic participation any of them.

The premeditated killing of any human being - particularly one already in custody - is an affront to human dignity and to civilization itself.

 

[hxcCatholic413]

The innocent unborn have committed no crimes. Criminals that are executed have committed crimes, like murder. It is not contradictory at all to be pro-life and pro-capital punishment.

pro-life and pro-capital punishment is a contradiction. What happens in an abortion? murder of an innocent child What happens in the death penalty? murder of a criminal. In great times of distress and anger we fail to see the goodness of the human person. At first glance when we hear that a heinous crime has occurred we might instinctively think that the responsible party should be put to death; HOWEVER as Catholics the ability to love unconditionally needs to be realized within this situation. To see that this person is not a monster, but a child of God is key just like those who say a baby is no more than a collection of cells, rather than a beautiful child of God. Only God can end a person’s life, a man should NEVER end another man’s life. It’s as simple as that, a basic teaching of the Church. May the Holy Spirit grant the gifts of wisdom, understanding, counsel, fortitude and knowledge to each and ever one of us. God Bless!

 

[Reservoir_Dog]

Prison gangs – like the Mexican Mafia – operate from inside prison and control racketeering, extortion, murder, rape, drug trafficking inside and outside. Just because gang leaders are sentenced to life without parole doesn’t prevent them from communicating with allies in prison or on the outside and they can and do order murders carried out by others. Its a dangerous fantasy to think that any prison is secure enough to make the public safe from these people.