Is the Death Penalty intrinsically evil?

[Caveman]

How about Ronnie Chandler, the first person sentenced to death after the 1963 suspension? He was convicted on the evidence of a single witness, who has since recanted, and appears (based on physical evidence) to quite possibly be the real killer. The conviction itself may well yet be overturned.

I didn’t start taking a look at this until I read Evangalium Vitae in the 90’s. I felt compelled to obey the Pope as a Roman Catholic, but was struggling with the teaching. When I last look closely at it a few years ago, there were at least 8 cases with DNA evidence and 3 overturned convictions. Most DP proponent groups put the number at 12-16, opponent groups higher.

It shouldn’t be surprising, by 2002 we’d released 100 death row inmates and are still looking at some massive releases in OK and Penn (evidence of consistant false testimony from state experts and dubious racial practices). If you are innaccurately sentencing that large a percentage of people to death, it is inevitable that you are going to execute some of them.

This is exactly why my position is “only in cases of extreme gravity, and only rarely”.

Those where there is no doubt whatsoever… as St Dismas said “we are getting the punishment we DESERVE”.

(caps for emphasis, not for yelling!)

 

[bilop]

No, it’s not - it depends on the circumstances of the society. In a society without safe and secure prisons, the death penalty isn’t morally evil. But in our society, it is.

That can’t really be true.

A sin is a sin, is a sin, at all places and times. There are no new sins.

That is why the Church can never declare capital punishment intrinsically evil. If it wasn’t for 2000 years, it can’t be now.

A very simple example. You have an inmate sentenced to life without parole. He kills a guard or inmate. What do you do? With no death penalty, he can continue to murder at will.

God Bless

 

[Caveman]

That can’t really be true.

A sin is a sin, is a sin, at all places and times. There are no new sins.

That is why the Church can never declare capital punishment intrinsically evil. If it wasn’t for 2000 years, it can’t be now.

A very simple example. You have an inmate sentenced to life without parole. He kills a guard or inmate. What do you do? With no death penalty, he can continue to murder at will.

God Bless

You have to understand, Bilop. The anti-DP crowd considers sin to be a question of geography.

What’s a sin in the United States (the death penalty), ISN’T a sin in your average, run-of-the-mill 3d World country. See? It’s a question of geography!

Just like the pro-abortion bunch. They think the same way. If a baby is on one certain side of the birth canal… it isn’t a human being. But if that baby makes it to the OTHER side of the birth canal… then it IS a human being! See? It’s a question of geography!!!

In other words, both camps are trying to have it both ways. Or as Pope Benedict stated… the Dictatorship of Relativism.

 

[goofyjim]

IMO the death penalty is evil and unnecessary.

 

[Genesis315]

The death penalty is like war. In a perfect world there would be neither. But, because there are sinners, the state is authorized by God to use it when it is necessary to protect those God has placed in its care.

That is the principle. Now, when that principle is applied to specific fact situations, there can be legitimate debate as to the conclusion reached for that specific situation.

 

[bilop]

IMO the death penalty is evil and unnecessary.

What do you do with a convict serving life-without-parole who commits murder?

God Bless

 

[SoCalRC]

You have to understand, Bilop. The anti-DP crowd considers sin to be a question of geography.

I’m sorry, I don’t see the point of such a characterization. I object to the death penalty for several reasons. First because I am a Roman Catholic and our undisputed moral leader explained clearly that with very little risk to society, killing prisoners is a poor expression of our other Christian obligations.

Second, it claims a number of innocents, the killing of innocent life is the closest thing we have to an absolute prohibition in my faith.

Third, I am concerned about the toll it takes on others. Jurors, executioners… I have seen combat from close proximity and know that even violence that is argued to be justified weighs heavily on the human spirit. Also, the preponderance of research suggests that not only is the death penalty not a deterent, it actually can desensitize people to violence.

Fourth, as a citizen, I am concerned about the extraordinary cost. Even the supreme court acknowledged that it is cheaper to encarcerate than execute, and that was before Illinois and other states started adding additional safeguards because of excessive wrongful convictions.

In other words, both camps are trying to have it both ways. Or as Pope Benedict stated… the Dictatorship of Relativism.

Actually, no. You either accept that each of us is a unique, infinitely loved, creation of God, or not. You either accept Christ’s message that we should not try to assert our moral authority or you do not. And, of course, you either accept that we can follow Christ with confidence that there is a God who can be trusted to dispense ultimate justice.

If you accept that we treasure human life, be it in the form of a dangerous non viable pregnancy (our ban on abortion is absolute) or a comotose patient in a persistant state, and you accept what we regularly profess - that we are all sinners, unworthy to receive Christ, but welcome at God’s table, then judgement and vengence alone are not justification for exectutions.

Picking and choosing what forms of life we treasure is what Pope Benedict refers to as the Dictatorship of Relativism. He even used several culture of life examples in his last (or next to last?) book.

Peace

 

[Caveman]

What do you do with a convict serving life-without-parole who commits murder?

God Bless

Simple. Give him, yet another, life sentence.

The anti-DP crowd pats themselves on the back… another family buries, yet another, victim.

 

[Caveman]

I’m sorry, I don’t see the point of such a characterization. I object to the death penalty for several reasons. First because I am a Roman Catholic and our undisputed moral leader explained clearly that with very little risk to society, killing prisoners is a poor expression of our other Christian obligations.

Second, it claims a number of innocents, the killing of innocent life is the closest thing we have to an absolute prohibition in my faith.

Third, I am concerned about the toll it takes on others. Jurors, executioners… I have seen combat from close proximity and know that even violence that is argued to be justified weighs heavily on the human spirit. Also, the preponderance of research suggests that not only is the death penalty not a deterent, it actually can desensitize people to violence.

Fourth, as a citizen, I am concerned about the extraordinary cost. Even the supreme court acknowledged that it is cheaper to encarcerate than execute, and that was before Illinois and other states started adding additional safeguards because of excessive wrongful convictions.

Actually, no. You either accept that each of us is a unique, infinitely loved, creation of God, or not. You either accept Christ’s message that we should not try to assert our moral authority or you do not. And, of course, you either accept that we can follow Christ with confidence that there is a God who can be trusted to dispense ultimate justice.

If you accept that we treasure human life, be it in the form of a dangerous non viable pregnancy (our ban on abortion is absolute) or a comotose patient in a persistant state, and you accept what we regularly profess - that we are all sinners, unworthy to receive Christ, but welcome at God’s table, then judgement and vengence alone are not justification for exectutions.

Picking and choosing what forms of life we treasure is what Pope Benedict refers to as the Dictatorship of Relativism. He even used several culture of life examples in his last (or next to last?) book.

Peace

I asked a rather simple question; 'Is the DP intrinsically evil"?

The anti-DP crowd has tried their level best to state it is. And by the way, have failed miserably.

And much to their chagrin, I happen to have Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition amd 2,000 years of official Catholic Teaching that state that it ISN’T intrinsically evil.

 

[goofyjim]

I asked a rather simple question; 'Is the DP intrinsically evil"?

The anti-DP crowd has tried their level best to state it is. And by the way, have failed miserably.

And much to their chagrin, I happen to have Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition amd 2,000 years of official Catholic Teaching that state that it ISN’T intrinsically evil.

It is a matter of opinion. One is free to consider it evil or not. Public opinion determines this one not Church teaching.

 

[SoCalRC]

I asked a rather simple question; 'Is the DP intrinsically evil"?

The anti-DP crowd has tried their level best to state it is. And by the way, have failed miserably.

And much to their chagrin, I happen to have Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition amd 2,000 years of official Catholic Teaching that state that it ISN’T intrinsically evil.

I did not state that it is intrinsically evil, nor did the Pope. But the Church Catachism is a reflection of Catholic teaching. Arguing that one is a better interpretor of Scripture or Tradition than the Holy See is anathema (see the First Vatican Council and the Dogmatic Constitution of the Church).

And my objection remains the same, why stereotype? I am opposed to the DP, but do not fit your mold, so why paint us in broad strokes? Dehumanizing one’s opponents is seemingly the opposite of the underlying principles behind our current teaching on the matter.

 

[Caveman]

It is a matter of opinion. One is free to consider it evil or not. Public opinion determines this one not Church teaching.

That wasn’t the question GJ. It’s “is the DP intrinsically evil”… not “do *you *consider it evil”.

 

[Caveman]

I did not state that it is intrinsically evil, nor did the Pope. But the Church Catachism is a reflection of Catholic teaching. Arguing that one is a better interpretor of Scripture or Tradition than the Holy See is anathema (see the First Vatican Council and the Dogmatic Constitution of the Church).

And my objection remains the same, why stereotype? I am opposed to the DP, but do not fit your mold, so why paint us in broad strokes? Dehumanizing one’s opponents is seemingly the opposite of the underlying principles behind our current teaching on the matter.

I’ll state it. yet again… I’m asking a fairly simple question; is the DP intrinsically evil?

I’m getting quite a bit of “Oh no! You should execute anyone because (insert personal opinion here)” or individuals trying their level best to interpret the current personal opinions of many Church leaders as somehow defined dogma or as an inffalible teaching.

And my all time favorite – “it’s a sin in America, but I’m not too sure about the 3d World”.

SoCalRC, if you happen to be personally against it, that’s fine. But please, just answer my painfully simple question.

BTW, if you do consider it to be intrinsically evil, please cite the official Church teaching stating so. And if don’t consider it such, would you believe that there are conditions when it could rightly be applied?

Thank you.

 

[goofyjim]

That wasn’t the question GJ. It’s “is the DP intrinsically evil”… not “do *you *consider it evil”.

Well if you are going to use scripture what about “Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord.” I think this could be applied to show the evil of man taking the life of another man even for revenge which the death penalty essentially is. Life without parole suffices to prevent future murders unless it is in the prison system. We out here are safe and at least an innocent person wrongfully convicted can be given time to be exonerated. The death penalty is evil.

 

[Caveman]

Well if you are going to use scripture what about “Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord.” I think this could be applied to show the evil of man taking the life of another man even for revenge which the death penalty essentially is. Life without parole suffices to prevent future murders unless it is in the prison system. We out here are safe and at least an innocent person wrongfully convicted can be given time to be exonerated. The death penalty is evil.

GJ,
You’re not answering the question. So I’ll ask it, yet again.

Is the death penalty* intrinsically *evil?

And I’ll ask the same add-on that I asked of SoCalRC – if you do believe that it’s intrinsically evil, please cite the official Church Teaching stating such. And if you believe that it isn’t *intrinsically *evil, is there a circumstance that you beieve it could be warranted?

Thank you.

 

[goofyjim]

GJ,
You’re not answering the question. So I’ll ask it, yet again.

Is the death penalty* intrinsically *evil?

And I’ll ask the same add-on that I asked of SoCalRC – if you do believe that it’s intrinsically evil, please cite the official Church Teaching stating such. And if you believe that it isn’t *intrinsically *evil, is there a circumstance that you beieve it could be warranted?

Thank you.

I don’t need Church approval to believe that it is intrinsically evil. This is a growing teaching of the Church that is not set in stone. Much like they used to okay slavery but don’t anymore. Who in their right mind would not consider slavery an intrinsic evil? Yet St. Paul never pushed for an end to slavery in his time and the Old Testament supported it. So while there may be no official Church teaching to say it is intrinsically evil there is none to say it isn’t either. This leaves it to opinion only. I don’t feel it is ever warranted.

 

[Caveman]

I don’t need Church approval to believe that it is intrinsically evil. This is a growing teaching of the Church that is not set in stone. Much like they used to okay slavery but don’t anymore. Who in their right mind would not consider slavery an intrinsic evil? Yet St. Paul never pushed for an end to slavery in his time and the Old Testament supported it. So while there may be no official Church teaching to say it is intrinsically evil there is none to say it isn’t either. This leaves it to opinion only. I don’t feel it is ever warranted.

I’m not asking this question from the perspective of individual opinions… rather from the perspective of official Church Teaching. I’ve made that abundantly clear from the beginning.

So I’ll ask sigh yet again —

Is the DP* intrinsically* evil?

 

[goofyjim]

I’m not asking this question from the perspective of individual opinions… rather from the perspective of official Church Teaching. I’ve made that abundantly clear from the beginning.

So I’ll ask sigh yet again —

Is the DP* intrinsically* evil?

And since there is no official Church teaching on whether or not it is intrinsically evil the question cannot be asked the way it is being asked here.

 

[rlg94086]

I’ll state it. yet again… I’m asking a fairly simple question; is the DP intrinsically evil?

I’m getting quite a bit of “Oh no! You should execute anyone because (insert personal opinion here)” or individuals trying their level best to interpret the current personal opinions of many Church leaders as somehow defined dogma or as an inffalible teaching.

And my all time favorite – “it’s a sin in America, but I’m not too sure about the 3d World”.

SoCalRC, if you happen to be personally against it, that’s fine. But please, just answer my painfully simple question.

BTW, if you do consider it to be intrinsically evil, please cite the official Church teaching stating so. And if don’t consider it such, would you believe that there are conditions when it could rightly be applied?

Thank you.

Hi Caveman,

I think SoCalRC basically ceded the fact that it is not intrinsically evil in his last post -

SoCalRC:

I did not state that it is intrinsically evil, nor did the Pope.

I take the same stance as you right now -

Caveman:

This is exactly why my position is “only in cases of extreme gravity, and only rarely”.

I think you are right that this answers the death of an innocent, but some of SoCalRC’s points are compelling. Primarily, the cost aspect and the toll it takes on those who carry it out. The sticky point for me is the “protection of society” aspect - the ability of some to escape and kill again (my guess - this has probably happened more often than the execution of an innocent), and the ability to kill a guard or other inmate in prison. These are not easy issues to me, though I know you and SoCalRC are very certain in your beliefs.

Bottomline though, regarding the thread: If you really are only interested in discussing whether it is “intrinsically evil,” there is no need for further discussion. You and I (and I’m sure 99% of those who are stridently anti-DP) know that there is absolutely no Church teaching that says the DP is intrinsically evil.

 

[Ray_Scheel]

Not only does someone like Charles Manson NEVER deserve a chance to return to society (would YOU want to be his new next door neighbor?) but his repeated parole hearings are an insult to the families of all those he murdered and a sad commentary on some of the twisted practices of our government/legal system. Quite frankly, Charles Manson should have been put to death a long, long time ago.

The Serial killers with fan clubs are perhaps the best illustration we have of how modern prisons are not sufficient to keep society safe from some of these, particularly since being allowed to communicate with the outside has long been considered a basic right of the incarcerated by the church.

---

Also, the 13,000 prisoners is supermax prisons are held in solitary confinement for 22-24 hours a day, which inclines me to believe that they in fact do not pose a realistic threat to other inmates.

We had one manage to nearly saw off the arm of a volunteer with chaplaincy a couple years ago before a large enough team go there to get the door open (he’d pulled the arm through a port after a ruse)

---

Further, it is widely acknowledged that there have almost certainly been a number of wrongful executions since reinstatement.

Really? Can you name one? “Almost certainly” doesn’t cut it. As someone who is on the fence on this issue, I would be interested in real evidence.

How about Ronnie Chandler, the first person sentenced to death after the 1963 suspension?

So RLG doesn’t spend too much time scratching his head wondering how someone who is still alive can serve as an example of a wrongful execution (and other reader’s don’t think proof of this type of tragedy was actually provided) Ronnie Chandler was not executed but was instead on of Clinton’s last-minute pardons after no small amount of political pressure was generated on his behalf.

I’ve learned with some posters here you can almost bet on the case citations provided not actually lining up with what it is implied they do.