Life or Death?

[SSTeacher]

Is capital punishment right or wrong and how can one substantiate one’s answer?

Courteously,
Mick
:tiphat:

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

Is capital punishment right or wrong and how can one substantiate one’s answer?

Courteously,
Mick
:tiphat:

I believe it is right.

Someone who has no respect for the life of others has forfeited the right to live.

In 1995 I read that since the death penalty was reinstated, (1970s), over 800 people had been killed by those already convicted of murder.

Those who oppose the death penalty share some responsibility for these murders.

In addition, I think a firm date for meeting your maker might lead to more introspection, prayer, and conversions.

 

[ralphinal]

I think it is wrong, but I do not deny the state the right to use it.

There is no proof what so ever, and plenty to the contrary, that the threat of the death penalty has prevented crime. Here in Alabama, we use it quite a bit, not as much as Texas, but we do use it. We still have one of the cities with the highest per capita murder rate (Birmingham), and several cities on the high crime list. If you look at the data gathered from those who commit crimes, they never considered getting caught or had reasons that they were unconcerned.

Psychologically, the use of the death penalty in the United States does not meet with the tried and true definition of good punishment. It is not quick, related to the issue, and does not impart any ability to learn the rules.

From an ethical standpoint, there are issues with the actual laws determining what is and is not a capitol offence. If I kill you, it is murder. If I use a gun (in most places) or rob you, it becomes a death penalty offense. Now, your life is worth the same amount to you no matter if I shoot you or take your watch. However, that is not how the law sees it. Killing another human being without cause is one of the most heinus crimes one can commit, yet it is not seen that way by the law.

My great-grandfather preached the funeral of a man killed about a century ago. A week later, he was the minister present at the last official hanging in Cullman County, AL, and maybe the last one in the state. It was not the last time someone committed a capitol offense. He preached other funerals of men killed by other men. Where does it get us?

 

[Trishie]

Hi, Mick,
In Australia capital punishment was abolished in the mid 20th century…so here it’s considered wrong.

 

[SSTeacher]

Hi, Mick,
In Australia capital punishment was abolished in the mid 20th century…so here it’s considered wrong.

Hello Trishie,

Thanks for telling me this. But, regardless of the legislation, how do you view the issue?

Wonderingly,
Mick

 

[Trishie]

Mick I think that sometimes people commit horrific crimes. And it is unjust that the taxpayers have to support them for the remainder of their lives. I couldn’t support the deliberate killing of anyone, unborn or even murderer. I have to hope and pray in any case for conversion of killers, which may not occur if life is cut short by execution.
Understand, by the way, that Australians don’t have a culture of keeping guns for protection (as some areas of the US appear to have as I understand) which probably knocks out some possible killings.

God bless!

 

[Trishie]

Mick, when people kill or damage others, children or anyone else I feel great outrage, as how dare any person think they have the right to take or ruin anyone’s life, a gift which belongs to the individual himself or herself, so my outrage on behalf of the victims is very strong. This includes the great wrong, the unjust theft of a life from the family who loves them.

Anyone who rapes or murders is abusing and taking from others their unique right as persons…enormous injustice…but I still don’t support killing the perpetrator. Apart from the fact that to harm doesn’t sit with me, there is the commandment of God, thou shalt not kill. To kill in retribution does not redress terrible wrongs. The wrongs remain. To comfort the remaining families? What comfort. Their loved ones are still gone from their lives. Nothing makes up for that loss.

 

[Alix1912]

I believe it is right.

Someone who has no respect for the life of others has forfeited the right to live.

In 1995 I read that since the death penalty was reinstated, (1970s), over 800 people had been killed by those already convicted of murder.

Those who oppose the death penalty share some responsibility for these murders.

In addition, I think a firm date for meeting your maker might lead to more introspection, prayer, and conversions.

I agree. God does forgive all sins if you confess and repent, but he also says his forgivness doesn’t absolve you of atonement on earth for your sins. You might be saved afterward, but you still owe a debt to society for your crimes.

For people whose crimes are premeditated, heinous and are not repentant for them…they really have lost their right to life, and it is not fair that the innocent taxpayers pay for them until they die.

I also agree that prehaps a set date might encourage a little thought as to why you are facing the death penalty, and perhaps bring about a change of heart.

 

[cathopologist]

Is capital punishment right or wrong and how can one substantiate one’s answer?

If you believe abortion is murder, then so is capital punishment. If you believe euthanasia is murder, then so is capital punishment. If you believe suicide - murder of oneself is wrong, then why should capital punishment be seen as something justifiable?

When you send a man to his death, you are assisting in his suicide - for his soul has already deteriorated from the immense guilt the unforgiving prison walls projected before his eyes. When you send the woman in her prime to her death, you have deprived her the opportunity to create life and also assisted in the torturous murder of herself.

 

[Blade_and_Blood]

Is capital punishment right or wrong and how can one substantiate one’s answer?

Courteously,
Mick
:tiphat:

I believe it is wrong. By using capital punishment, it shows us how weak our society is–as if we don’t have the time and patience to solve conflicts, help people, or be there when someone is in dire need of spiritual, medical, or emotional attention.

Besides, it’s rather useless; compared to the states without capital punishment, those with it have about the same crime rate as those without.

Knowing all this has deemed capital punishment, in my mind, as illogical.

Ironically Yours, Blade and Blood

 

[Soutane]

I think that capital punishment can be right AND wrong.There are some crimes that demand the noose or whatever.I believe that the Nazi war criminals executed at Nuremburgh deserved their fate and that justice would not have been served by anything less.I believe that Israel was one hundred percent correct in executing Eichmann-even though Israel does not have the death penalty for domestic murder.Decency demanded that he pay the ultimate price.In cases like this society requires a purgation if you will.I have no problem with the death penalty for premeditated murder or murder committed in the course of other crimes.Canada no longer has the death penalty like Australia but if it was ever put to a referendum…
My only hesitancy in approving the death penalty is the number of "murderers"who have been subsequently exhonorated both in Canada and the U.S.We can’t afford to be wrong ONCE.

 

[CatsAndDogs]

Is capital punishment right or wrong and how can one substantiate one’s answer?

Courteously,
Mick
:tiphat:

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.

:shamrock2:

 

[SSTeacher]

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.

:shamrock2:

CatsAndDogs,

Thanks very much for supplying the link to the Catechism of the Catholic Church. But what’s your opinion (and why)?

Curiously,
Mick

 

[CatsAndDogs]

CatsAndDogs,

Thanks very much for supplying the link to the Catechism of the Catholic Church. But what’s your opinion (and why)?

Curiously,
Mick

My opinion is the (obligatory) Catholic one, as enumerated in those documents. The “why” behind that “opinion” is because killing is a moral issue, and in all issues of faith and morals I’m called to be docile to the understandings of the Church.

Personally, I’d choose creating an archipelago of “ethical” Devil’s Islands over capital punishment.

:shamrock2:

 

[SSTeacher]

My opinion is the (obligatory) Catholic one, as enumerated in those documents. The “why” behind that “opinion” is because killing is a moral issue, and in all issues of faith and morals I’m called to be docile to the understandings of the Church.

Personally, I’d choose creating an archipelago of “ethical” Devil’s Islands over capital punishment.

:shamrock2:

In matters of faith and morals we Potestants simply give in to our inclinations, find Bible verses to endorse our contradictory stances and then come together to claim that we’re submitting to the Authority of the Bible. For us, the practical application is easy.

Thanks for being so forthright. I admire your submission to the Authority of your Church.

Grace and peace,
Mick

 

[Auriel]

I am against the death penalty myself. One of the attorneys I previously worked for worked in Criminal appeals. You would not believe all the stuff that goes on.

We may be the freest country in the world, but our Justice system is seriously flawed.

Most on death row are poor. And you get what you pay for.

Statistically speaking in cases that have been verified as wrongful convictions that resulted in exonerations, about 8% of those people were sitting on death row.

The response in a few states is to look into new laws that would speed up the execution process. Wrongful convictions give them a black eye.

Its wrong, if even one person is wrongfully executed it should be stopped. The fact is, there has been quite a few people wrongfully executed.

There are many reasons for the mistakes, they include but are not limited too, faulty identification, tampering of evidence, using jail house snitches, and forced confessions.

DNA evidence is only kept in a cases of violent crime. Texas is infamous for its number of executions.

In Dallas county alone, they are infamous for another reason, their number of exonerations because of DNA testing, even in rape cases. They hold the Nations record.

Another thing to look at, thought, once free most have been ruined. They lost everything and must start all over. No amount of compensation can make up for lost time.

The average amount of time a person spends in prison before being exonerated? 12 years! And they are the lucky ones! Most can’t get anyone to look at their case because the joke is, they all find jail house religion and all crooks say they are innocent.

I can only imagine what it must feel like to be strapped down to a gurney, with an IV in the arm, about to meet your maker. Reviled and innocent. And no one would listen.

And if I am not mistaken, though I should look it up, not every state even allows for post conviction DNA testing.

Let me give you the projected numbers, from low to high, of the estimated number of people sitting just in Texas Prisons for violent crimes they did not commit. The estimated numbers range anywhere from four hundred to five thousand people.

I say unless we can address that and fix it, then end it, that’s too many innocent lives.

 

[yellowbird]

Wrong. If I served on a jury, I could never vote to sentence someone to die. I think only God should decide when someone dies. We have the ability to keep people locked up until their natural death so they are no threat to society. Also, if they insist that they are innocent, there is always that chance that new evidence would be brought forward so they could prove it.

There have been cases of innocent people being put to death for crimes they did not commit. ONE mistake is one too many.

I just don’t think we have a right to end another’s life regardless of how heinous the crime was. We will all stand before God someday - nobody gets away with anything.

 

[CatsAndDogs]

Wrong. If I served on a jury, I could never vote to sentence someone to die. I think only God should decide when someone dies.

Well, just tell them that when they ask you about your views, and you’re off the jury, pronto!

Would you be amenable to sending an actual guilty “perp” to a small island in the Aleutians for the rest of his/her life?

Best to you!

:shamrock2: