Stan "Tookie" Williams

[SydLake]

Ani Ibi:

Explain ‘rate’ please, using references to comparative numbers between the US and Canada.

You tell me. Was the prison in which Tookie Williams found himself badly designed? If so, then how would you design his prison?

In any case, to unravel your suggestion, it is enough to say that one convicted murderer committed more murders while in prison. That murderer was Tookie Williams.

That doesn’t cut it. You made the analogy. It is not for me to draw your conclusion for you. If you are unable to justify equating the death sentences in China and Saudi Arabia with those of the US, then I am forced to conclude that you concede that your statement was a false analogy.

Ah! But you continue to evade the point, don’t you? Revenge has absolutely nothing to do with protection-- as I have said before. By placing the convicted murderer in prison, society attempts to remove him/her from the general population of society. Otherwise what is the point of putting him/her in prison?

For the time that the prisoner is in prison, the general population is protected – supposedly – from further predation on the part of the prisoner. ’ Supposedly ’ because in Tookie William’s case, a prison guard was killed and someone outside the prison was killed – directly as a result of William’s ability to contract killings.

Carrying out the death sentence before these killings occurred would have protected the victims. It would have had absolutely nothing to do with revenge. And it has nothing to do with soothed feelings. Soothed feelings is a strawman argument. No one on this thread has argued for soothed feelings. You just threw that in hoping it would stick. It didn’t stick.

Sarcasm doesn’t help your case. The context of how and what Jesus taught does not offend me. The fact that you have avoided several requests that I have made in the face of my having responded to your posts I find disrespectful. The fact that you have avoided any reference to Catholic teaching – which is the same as what Jesus taught – I find disrespectful.

1. What is the Catholic teaching in this matter? Do you know? Or do you not know?
2. What do you have to say to the families of those murdered while Tookie Williams was in prison? Do those people not count? Would you ignore them as merely the cost of keeping Williams alive for the sake of keeping him alive? You have not spoken for them. Should they be without voice?
3. Can you demonstrate in detail how you would protect law-abiding citizens from a particular convicted murderer? If so, please proceed.
4. Can you demonstrate in detail how you would protect law-abiding citizens from **all **convicted murderers? If so, please proceed.
5. Can you design a superior prison to the one in which Tookie Williams found himself? If so, please describe this prison.

It is puzzling why you call my use of what Jesus taught as sarcasm.

That being the case, you can look up the other stuff when you are looking up what Jesus taught about revenge, forgiveness and treating the least like they may be Him.

You create all these straw men questions when you don’t even know the meaning of the term “rate” and you say you are from canada and don’t care for their death penalty policies and yet you don’t know about how their murder rate is lower than the US.

As for the vicitms of Tookie, does killing him bring them back? Does it enrich anybody’s life to get revenge? How close have you been to a murder victim? From personal experience I can tell you that the penalty or punishment doesn’t bring closure. It never replaces the loss.

Peace

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Utah Ken:

Alright, perhaps Iraq was too easy a comparison, how about the capital punishment in China, Cuba, Egypt. Are all of these lawless countries? And for that matter what of the laws? who arbitrates?

If killing is wrong for the terrorists, and Williams, then is it correct for the United States government, or the state of California?

Ken:

I’m sure you must understand the difference between the killing of the guilty in order to prevent further crimes and the slaughter of the innocent in order to intimidate others.

The terrorists slaughter innocents people who’ve committed no crime. Governments are allowed by moral law to tak take the lives of murderers who have been convicted of the crimes by due process of law when the crimes are so heinous as to merit no other punishment.

Do you believe the killing of the Nazi thugs by the Nuremberg Tribunals was equivalent to what the Nazis did in their Crimes Against Peace, war Crimes and Crimes Against humanity? Do you agree with me that the Nuremberg Tribunals and their partner Tribunals had the right to out the War Criminals they convicted to death? Or, Do you think they were wrong to do so? On what grounds?

Please remember, Church teaching allowed for the use of Capital Punishment when punishing convicted murderers for over 1900 years.

In Christ, Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Semper Fi:

The Church cannot fall into heresy. It’s not a “modern innovation” either, because as I said before, show me a time in the past where societies have been stable enough as they are now to keep prisoners locked up for life? Unless you can prove in the Gospel where Jesus would have killed someone for their crimes, then I’ll agree with you. Jesus is about forgiveness, and redemption. The culture of death, which includes capital punishment, is not.

Semper Fi:

The only way to keep someone like Tookie Williams from ordering hits from inside of prison is 24 hour/day, 7 day/week solitary confinement with NO contact with the outside world… Would you be willing to do that? Do you think we would be able to do that for 40-50 years?

The Catechism said that the Death Penalty could be applied when safety from someone and his ability to have others commit crimes could not be assured.

Capital Punishment

*2266 The State’s effort to contain the spread of behaviors injurious to human rights and the fundamental rules of civil coexistence corresponds to the requirement of watching over the common good. Legitimate public authority has the right and duty to inflict penalties commensurate with the gravity of the crime. the primary scope of the penalty is to redress the disorder caused by the offense. When his punishment is voluntarily accepted by the offender, it takes on the value of expiation. Moreover, punishment, in addition to preserving public order and the safety of persons, has a medicinal scope: as far as possible it should contribute to the correction of the offender.67

2267 *The traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude, presupposing full ascertainment of the identity and responsibility of the offender, recourse to the death penalty, when this is the only practicable way to defend the lives of human beings effectively against the aggressor. **
"If, instead, bloodless means are sufficient to defend against the aggressor and to protect the safety of persons, public authority should limit itself to such means, because they better correspond to the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.
"Today, in fact, given the means at the State’s disposal to effectively repress crime by rendering inoffensive the one who has committed it, without depriving him definitively of the possibility of redeeming himself, cases of absolute necessity for suppression of the offender ‘today … are very rare, if not practically non-existent.’[John Paul II, Evangelium vitae 56.]

Are you saying that all the peple who had been in contact with Tookie Williams would have been protected against him and people sent by him without recourse to either the Death Penalty or the means of incarceration which I described above which have been called “Inhumane” by the APA and various Human Rights Org’s?

Remember, he did order hits from inside of jail - from Death Row!

His wound as a result of one of those is what placed him in solitary and allegedly led to his “conversion”.

In Christ, Michael

 

[Utah_Ken]

Traditional Ang:

Ken:

I’m sure you must understand the difference between the killing of the guilty in order to prevent further crimes and the slaughter of the innocent in order to intimidate others.

The terrorists slaughter innocents people who’ve committed no crime. Governments are allowed by moral law to tak take the lives of murderers who have been convicted of the crimes by due process of law when the crimes are so heinous as to merit no other punishment.

Do you believe the killing of the Nazi thugs by the Nuremberg Tribunals was equivalent to what the Nazis did in their Crimes Against Peace, war Crimes and Crimes Against humanity? Do you agree with me that the Nuremberg Tribunals and their partner Tribunals had the right to out the War Criminals they convicted to death? Or, Do you think they were wrong to do so? On what grounds?

Please remember, Church teaching allowed for the use of Capital Punishment when punishing convicted murderers for over 1900 years.

In Christ, Michael

Of course I understand. I was posing essentially a rhetorical question meant to underscore the fallibility of men. Further it was in response to another posting that was also going out on a limb to illustrate a point.

I still hold the view that the execution of Williams was wrong. In the case of Williams, society was protected, or could have been protected from his violence/crimes without resorting to execution.

I could certainly be wrong in my position, however, I would rather err on the side of life.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Utah Ken:

Our nation should forgo the use of the death penalty because The sanction of death, when it is not necessary to protect society, violates respect for human life and dignity. State-sanctioned killing in our names diminishes all of us. Its application is deeply flawed and can be irreversibly wrong, is prone to errors, and is biased by factors such as race, the quality of legal representation, and where the crime was committed. We have other ways to punish criminals and protect society.

*“I have set before you life and death, the

blessing and the curse. Choose life, then, that you

and your descendants may live.” (Dt 30:19)

USCCB
*

Ken:

I wouldn’t recommend citing scripture to defend an anti-Death Penalty position…

*“Whoever strikes a man a mortal blow must be put to death. He, however, who did not hunt a man down, but caused his death by an act of God, may flee to a place which I will set apart for this purpose. But when a man kills another after maliciously scheming to do so, you must take him even from my altar and put him to death.” Exodus 21:12-14 NAB *

*"If a man strikes another with an iron instrument and causes his death, he is a murderer and shall be put to death. If a man strikes another with a death-dealing stone in his hand and causes his death, he is a murderer and shall be put to death. If a man strikes another with a death-dealing club in his hand and causes his death, he is a murderer and shall be put to death. The avenger of blood may execute the murderer, putting him to death on sight.

"If a man pushes another out of hatred, or after lying in wait for him throws something at him, and causes his death, or if he strikes another out of enmity and causes his death, he shall be put to death as a murderer. The avenger of blood may execute the murderer on sight.

"Whenever someone kills another, the evidence of witnesses is required for the execution of the murderer. The evidence of a single witness is not sufficient for putting a person to death.

“You shall not accept indemnity in place of the life of a murderer who deserves the death penalty; he must be put to death.” Numbers 35:16-21, 30-31 NAB *

“However, if someone lies in wait for his neighbor out of hatred for him, and rising up against him, strikes him mortally, and then takes refuge in one of these cities, the elders of his own city shall send for him and have him taken from there, and shall hand him over to be slain by the avenger of blood. Do not look on him with pity, but purge from Israel the stain of shedding innocent blood, that you may prosper.”
Deut 19:11-14 NAB

*Let every person be subordinate to the higher authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been established by God. Therefore, whoever resists authority opposes what God has appointed, and those who oppose it will bring judgment upon themselves. For rulers are not a cause of fear to good conduct, but to evil. Do you wish to have no fear of authority? Then do what is good and you will receive approval from it, for it is a servant of God for your good. But if you do evil, be afraid, for it does not bear the sword without purpose; it is the servant of God to inflict wrath on the evildoer.

Therefore, it is necessary to be subject not only because of the wrath but also because of conscience. Rom 13:1-5 NAB*

I think that’s enough. If you ever why the Ppe never condemned Capital Punishment outright or described it the terms he used when describing Abortion, the scriptures quoted above are why.

Please understand, Pope John Paul II’s personal experience was of the unjust and arbitrary application of the Death Penalty. That made it hard for him to accept that it could be justly applied.

But the Bishops can’t undo or unmake the scriptures above - They are all part of the Bible and considered to be part of the Traditional Teaching of the Church.

The second they try, someone else will decide that the scriptures that supports the Male Only Sacerdotal Priesthood or the Necessity of Chastity for Gays don’t really belong.

I don’t think you want to go down that route.

In Christ, Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Utah Ken:

Of course I understand. I was posing essentially a rhetorical question meant to underscore the fallibility of men. Further it was in response to another posting that was also going out on a limb to illustrate a point.

I still hold the view that the execution of Williams was wrong. In the case of Williams, society was protected, or could have been protected from his violence/crimes without resorting to execution.

I could certainly be wrong in my position, however, I would rather err on the side of life.

Ken:

Tookie Williams is known to have ordered hits from Death Row! There are people who are dead because he was able to have them killed during the prolonged Appeals Process he had…

He was stabbed in revenge for one of the hits he ordered by a relative of the person he had murdered. He was in solitary confinement for nearly 3 months as a result of the attack. That’s when he supposedly changed.

The only way we could have made it impossible for him to pass notes, etc. was to have placed him in Solitary Confinement 24 hours/Day, 7 Days/Week and then allowed him NO contact with the outside world except through a guard who would read everything he wrote and received and listen to everything he said and heard. If you’re going to disallow the Death Penalty, Incarceration for a Gang-Chieftain has to include this if he is to be rendered harmless and society rendered safe.

The APA has called that inhumane, as have several human rights groups. In order to keep the rest of us (including the Prison Guards) safe from this man and his proxies, would you be willing to risk their approbrium and to do that anyway?

If not, He would have been able to continue ordering executions from his jail cell. Would that really be keeping us safe? Would you be willing to take responsibility for those hits if he ordered them?

Several death Penalty Advocates have stated they would be willing to be responsible before God if all the legal safeguards failed and we killed an innocent man. By the same token, would you be willing to be responsible for the innocent people murdered by convicted murderers such as Tookie Williams during their prolonged appeals process or if we decide to overturn the Death penalty?

Unlike many, I’ve thought long and hard on this issue, and I’ve talked and listened to people from several points of view.

I just can’t escape that Tookie Williams ordered hits from Death Row while his case was being appealed. And, that convicted murderers killing more people (Prison Guards or people when they escape) is not all that unusual, and not rare enough to make us even reasonably secure.

The Pope didn’t say that we had to do away with the Death Penalty in spite of our security needs and those of the Prison Guards.

And, Please remember, you agreed there was a moral difference between the killing a convicted murderer and the slaughter of innocent people.

In Christ, Michael

 

[Al_Masetti]

What is FORGIVENESS?

What does the word “forgiveness” mean???

Does it mean that we totally overlook the crime and simply turn the killer free?

Would you be willing to host the killer in your house and assume responsibility for his actions thereafter?

If a killer says one thing and does something else (claims repentence and then fakes his sincerity and orders further killings from prison), then what do we do? Would you put this person up in your spare bedroom and accept responsibility for his subsequent actions?

If our society is unwilling to protect innocent life, then why should this society protect the life of someone who commits heinous crimes?

 

[Ani_Ibi]

SydLake:

It is puzzling why you call my use of what Jesus taught as sarcasm.

It is not puzzling.

SydLake:

That being the case, you can look up the other stuff when you are looking up what Jesus taught about revenge, forgiveness and treating the least like they may be Him.

I am not doing your work for you. Please be kind enough to do your own work.

It was you – not I – who raised certain points without arguing for them or supporting them in any way. It is up to you to defend your point of view or concede. So far you have not defended your point of view.

I have responded to each of your points. You have responded to none of mine. And that is not a discussion. That is you singlemindedly promoting your agenda.

What is Catholic teaching on legitimate self-defence? Do you know? Or do you not know? Yes or no?

SydLake:

You create all these straw men questions

’ All these questions ’ ? Please take the trouble to identify which questions you are labelling strawmen and explain why you think they are strawmen. ’ All these questions ’ doesn’t cut it.

SydLake:

when you don’t even know the meaning of the term “rate”

It is inappropriate for you to claim that I do not know the meaning of the term ‘rate.’ I asked you to explain how you were using the term ‘rate.’ Rather than do that so that we can discuss the point in question, you are throwing out yet another groundless accusation my way.

Please give numbers which support your claim for using the term ‘rate.’

SydLake:

and you say you are from canada and don’t care for their death penalty policies and yet you don’t know about how their murder rate is lower than the US.

My nationality is a red herring. It has no bearing on whether I agree with you on something you have not yet explained, which is comparative murder rates.

Please take the trouble to quote the part where I say I don’t care for Canada’s death penalty policies. I do not believe I said that I don’t care for Canada’s death penalty policies.

As for comparing murder rates between Canada and the US: you raised the point. It is your responsibility to defend the premise that Canada’s murder rate is lower than that of the US. It is not my responsibility.

If you cannot or will not defend your premise, then I am forced to conclude that you have conceded the point on comparative murder rates.

Please give the numbers for Canada and give the numbers for the US. Then compare rates using populations, time frames, geographical regions, and any other relevant factors.

SydLake:

As for the vicitms of Tookie, does killing him bring them back?

Bringing back the victims is a red herring. I never said I wanted to bring the victims back. I said I wanted to keep them here.

The point which I have raised is that imprisoning Williams has failed to protect other human beings from being murdered by him while he was in prison.

SydLake:

Does it enrich anybody’s life to get revenge?

Enriching somebody’s life to get revenge is a red herring. I never said I wanted revenge.

SydLake:

How close have you been to a murder victim?

Relevance? How does proximity affect the desire to protect people from being murdered by prisoners who have been convicted of murder?

continued…

 

[Ani_Ibi]

SydLake:

From personal experience I can tell you that the penalty or punishment doesn’t bring closure.

Yes, I agree. Penalty and punishment does not bring closure.

But I am not talking about penalty or punishment or closure. I am talking about protecting human beings from being murdered by prisoners who have been convicted of murder.

Penalty, punishment, and closure are red herrings.

SydLake:

It never replaces the loss.

Replacing the loss is a red herring. I never said I wanted to replace the loss.

Penalty and punishment do not replace the loss. Certainly forgiveness is in order.

I am not talking about replacing the loss and I am not talking about forgiveness. I am talking about protecting human beings from being murdered by prisoners who have been convicted of murder. This point you have several times now declined to address.

My contribution to this discussion has been to raise the problem of **protecting law-abiding citizens from being murdered **by prisoners who have been convicted of murder.

So let me set out plainly my contribution to this discussion:

PROBLEM:

A convicted murderer – while in prison – murders a prison guard. Or a convicted murderer – while in prison – contracts out to murder a person on the outside.

SOLUTION:

Do you allow that prisoner to continue murdering people while in prison? Yes or no?

If yes, then what concrete measures do you take to justify allowing him to continue murdering people while in prison to the families of the victims?

If no, then what concrete measures do you take to stop the prisoner – while he is in prison – from continuing to murder people?

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Utah Ken:

I would rather err on the side of life.

But, by not supporting a foolproof method of protecting people from being murdered by a prisoner, you are erring on the side of death.

 

[pira114]

I got news for you all.

Putting Williams in solitary (which does not actually exist anymore) would solve nothing. Inmates in the most secure prisons in the world have found ways to communicate rather easily by their standards. Remeber, Williams WAS in one of the most secure areas in all Ca. prisons!

And, again, the death penalty is not intended to prevent others from doing anything. And, no, it does not bring anyone back to life. It is a punishment. Pure and simple.

The U.S., Ca. in particular, has enacted so many laws and protections for prison inmates that it is liturally impossible to protect anyone in or out of prison from an inmate who is intent on hurting others. This is why I said that “solitary” does not exist anymore. By Ca. rules (Title 15 of the Ca. code) an inmate in “disciplinary isolation” (the new solitary) gets more time out of his cell than someone who is following the rules. That doesn’t have much berring on this topic, but it illistrates one of many points about how our prisons system caters to the criminal. These rules were meant to make it better for the inmate by elliminating cruel punishment, but at the same time it made it easier for inmates to manipulate the system.

As for Williams, I only know one thing for sure, he cannot ever hurt anyone again.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

pira114:

I got news for you all.

Putting Williams in solitary (which does not actually exist anymore) would solve nothing. Inmates in the most secure prisons in the world have found ways to communicate rather easily by their standards. Remeber, Williams WAS in one of the most secure areas in all Ca. prisons!

And, again, the death penalty is not intended to prevent others from doing anything. And, no, it does not bring anyone back to life. It is a punishment. Pure and simple.

The U.S., Ca. in particular, has enacted so many laws and protections for prison inmates that it is liturally impossible to protect anyone in or out of prison from an inmate who is intent on hurting others. This is why I said that “solitary” does not exist anymore. By Ca. rules (Title 15 of the Ca. code) an inmate in “disciplinary isolation” (the new solitary) gets more time out of his cell than someone who is following the rules. That doesn’t have much berring on this topic, but it illistrates one of many points about how our prisons system caters to the criminal. These rules were meant to make it better for the inmate by elliminating cruel punishment, but at the same time it made it easier for inmates to manipulate the system.

As for Williams, I only know one thing for sure, he cannot ever hurt anyone again.

pira114:

What you’ve described is DETERENCE and PREVENTION! We know what Tookie williams was capable of and we do what was necessary to keep him from repeating what he had already done. Can you agree that is Mr. Williams is no longer able to order another hit now that he is dead, and that the Death Penalty has PREVENTED him from killing more people in the future?

I figured true solitary didn’t exist in California, and that the laws had been structured to make it virtually impossible, but I felt the question needed to be asked to those who opposed Tookie William’s execution and the Death Penalty in general. I believed it was necessary to see what they were willing to do to keep INNOCENT people safe from murderers who were already Imprisoned, or if they didn’t know about the numbers of murderers who have killed while behind bars or ordered hits on others from behind bars.

What you’ve just demonstrated is that the preconditions outlined by Pope John Paul II for the elimination of the Death Penalty, the ability to keep INNOCENT people safe from murderers who are already imprisoned, simply don’t exist in the State of California.

Then the questions asked of the foes of the death penalty has to be, “Are you willing to take responsibility before God and the families of the victims of the additional people murdered by the murderers or by their proxies (contract killers they send) which they would have been unable to do if they had been received the Death penalty as required in the Old Testament and by Law?” “What are you willing to do to insure that convicted murderers do not murder anymore people, either directly or by proxy, while they serve out their Life Sentences in Prison?”

Remember, our first duty is not to the murderer, it’s to the INNOCENT who must be protected from being murdered by the murderer and his comrades.

In Christ, Michael

 

[pira114]

That’s exactly what I was hoping people would get out of my post.

 

[Utah_Ken]

Traditional Ang:

Ken:

I wouldn’t recommend citing scripture to defend an anti-Death Penalty position…

“Whoever strikes a man a mortal blow must be put to death. He, however, who did not hunt a man down, but caused his death by an act of God, may flee to a place which I will set apart for this purpose. But when a man kills another after maliciously scheming to do so, you must take him even from my altar and put him to death.” Exodus 21:12-14 NAB

"If a man strikes another with an iron instrument and causes his death, he is a murderer and shall be put to death. If a man strikes another with a death-dealing stone in his hand and causes his death, he is a murderer and shall be put to death. If a man strikes another with a death-dealing club in his hand and causes his death, he is a murderer and shall be put to death. The avenger of blood may execute the murderer, putting him to death on sight.

*"If a man pushes another out of hatred, or after lying in wait for him throws something at him, and causes his death, or if he strikes another out of enmity and causes his death, he shall be put to death as a murderer. The avenger of blood may execute the murderer on sight. *

"Whenever someone kills another, the evidence of witnesses is required for the execution of the murderer. The evidence of a single witness is not sufficient for putting a person to death.

“You shall not accept indemnity in place of the life of a murderer who deserves the death penalty; he must be put to death.” Numbers 35:16-21, 30-31 NAB

“However, if someone lies in wait for his neighbor out of hatred for him, and rising up against him, strikes him mortally, and then takes refuge in one of these cities, the elders of his own city shall send for him and have him taken from there, and shall hand him over to be slain by the avenger of blood. Do not look on him with pity, but purge from Israel the stain of shedding innocent blood, that you may prosper.”
Deut 19:11-14 NAB

Let every person be subordinate to the higher authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been established by God. Therefore, whoever resists authority opposes what God has appointed, and those who oppose it will bring judgment upon themselves. For rulers are not a cause of fear to good conduct, but to evil. Do you wish to have no fear of authority? Then do what is good and you will receive approval from it, for it is a servant of God for your good. But if you do evil, be afraid, for it does not bear the sword without purpose; it is the servant of God to inflict wrath on the evildoer.

Therefore, it is necessary to be subject not only because of the wrath but also because of conscience. Rom 13:1-5 NAB

I think that’s enough. If you ever why the Ppe never condemned Capital Punishment outright or described it the terms he used when describing Abortion, the scriptures quoted above are why.

Please understand, Pope John Paul II’s personal experience was of the unjust and arbitrary application of the Death Penalty. That made it hard for him to accept that it could be justly applied.

But the Bishops can’t undo or unmake the scriptures above - They are all part of the Bible and considered to be part of the Traditional Teaching of the Church.

The second they try, someone else will decide that the scriptures that supports the Male Only Sacerdotal Priesthood or the Necessity of Chastity for Gays don’t really belong.

I don’t think you want to go down that route.

In Christ, Michael

Thank you for your insight Michael, The following are a few cites that I consider.

Luke 23:34 - Jesus forgiving his own executioners

John 8 - Jesus confronting the would-be executioners of the adulteress

Matt 5:38 - When injured, turn the other cheek

Matt 7 - to avoid judgment, stop passing judgment

Matt 20:1-14 -the laborers in the vineyard: the last shall be first, and the first last

Matt 25-35-40 -The Last Judgment: what you do to the least among you, you do for Me

Luke 6:35-37 -love your enemy and do not condemn

Luke 15:11-32 -the Prodigal Son

John 1 - the law was received through Moses; grace came through Jesus Christ

Acts 7:60 -Stephen’s martyrdom

Romans 7:4 -we are “dead” to the law through the body of Jesus Christ

Romans 12:14-19 -vengeance is to be left to God

Galatians 3:23-24 -by virtue of faith in Jesus, the law is no longer in charge

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Utah Ken:

Luke 23:34 - Jesus forgiving his own executioners

John 8 - Jesus confronting the would-be executioners of the adulteress

Matt 5:38 - When injured, turn the other cheek

Matt 7 - to avoid judgment, stop passing judgment

Matt 20:1-14 -the laborers in the vineyard: the last shall be first, and the first last

Matt 25-35-40 -The Last Judgment: what you do to the least among you, you do for Me

Luke 6:35-37 -love your enemy and do not condemn

Luke 15:11-32 -the Prodigal Son

John 1 - the law was received through Moses; grace came through Jesus Christ

Acts 7:60 -Stephen’s martyrdom

Romans 7:4 -we are “dead” to the law through the body of Jesus Christ

Romans 12:14-19 -vengeance is to be left to God

Galatians 3:23-24 -by virtue of faith in Jesus, the law is no longer in charge

All of these are worthy of consideration but are completely irrelevant to the central issue. The central issue is protecting people from being murdered by prisoners.

While Williams was in prison, he started a riot which resulted in the death of a prison guard.

While Williams was in prison, he contracted out for the murder of people on the outside.

Conclusion: keeping Williams in prison did not, could not protect people from being murdered by him. Since one of the purposes of putting people in prison is to protect society from their predation, prison failed. Catholic teaching says that the death penalty must be avoided where it is possible to safely contain someone in prison. It was not possible to safely contain Williams in prison. Therefore the death penalty for Williams was licit.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Utah Ken:

Thank you for your insight Michael, The following are a few cites that I consider.

Luke 23:34 - Jesus forgiving his own executioners

John 8 - Jesus confronting the would-be executioners of the adulteress

Matt 5:38 - When injured, turn the other cheek

Matt 7 - to avoid judgment, stop passing judgment

Matt 20:1-14 -the laborers in the vineyard: the last shall be first, and the first last

Matt 25-35-40 -The Last Judgment: what you do to the least among you, you do for Me

Luke 6:35-37 -love your enemy and do not condemn

Luke 15:11-32 -the Prodigal Son

John 1 - the law was received through Moses; grace came through Jesus Christ

Acts 7:60 -Stephen’s martyrdom

Romans 7:4 -we are “dead” to the law through the body of Jesus Christ

Romans 12:14-19 -vengeance is to be left to God

Galatians 3:23-24 -by virtue of faith in Jesus, the law is no longer in charge

Ken:

What I cited are COMMANDMENTS and were REQUIRED. What you cited are what we are to do as INDIVIDUALS. The two are completely different and should never be conflated or confused. Becuase, if I take those scriptures and apply them to SOCIETY, you can’t even send murderers to jail and can do NOTHING to protect yourself from them.

Are you prepared to do that? Are you prepared to leave your neighbors unprotected against the likes of “Tookie” Williams?

Please understand, the second you arrest “Tookie” Williams or place someone like him in jail, you’ve violated those scriptures, if you are insisting they are to be applied to SOCIETY and CRIMINAL LAW!

I’m not! The Talmud states that he who refuses to protect his community from those who would harm them are no better than infidels.

Regarding “Vengeance” i don’t believe ANY rational advocte of the Death Penalty is advocating its advocating it as a tool of vengeance. If we were, we would be advocating that the Penalty be done in as painful a way as possible, which we’re NOT!

This constant insistance that we want the Death Penaly for purposes of Vengeance is therefore a Red Herring and is False. Making false accusations about people and their motivations is also a violations of the commandments. I’d appreciate it if you would stop this.

Can I just ask a few questions: How important are the lives of those who will become victims of vicious murderers like “Tookie” Williams when they arrange to have them killed while they are behind bars? Aren’t those INNOCENT lives at least as important as the lives of the guilty murderers who are supposed to protect them against?

I want to make sure you understand this - Our laws do NOT allow for the kind of solitary confinement or complete security that would prevent someone such as “Tookie” Williams from either starting a deadly riot (which he did) or ordering a “hit” (which he also did) on a person who was ooutside the prison.

Given those are the actual circumstances, are you willing tto do whatever is necessary to PROTECT the INNOCENT? or, Will the lives of the guilty be more important to you than the lives of those who guard them and any other INNOCENTS they will kill while they are alive?

As I said, Death Penalty advocates are willing to take responsibility before God for the one or two Innocent people who might be executed in spite of all of our legal safeguards. Are you willing to take responsibility before God for the dozens of INNOCENT people who will be slaughtered by convicted murderers who will be kept alive if people like you have your way?

I think these are all fair questions.

In Christ, Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Ani Ibi:

All of these are worthy of consideration but are completely irrelevant to the central issue. The central issue is protecting people from being murdered by prisoners.

While Williams was in prison, he started a riot which resulted in the death of a prison guard.

While Williams was in prison, he contracted out for the murder of people on the outside.

Conclusion: keeping Williams in prison did not, could not protect people from being murdered by him. Since one of the purposes of putting people in prison is to protect society from their predation, prison failed. Catholic teaching says that the death penalty must be avoided where it is possible to safely contain someone in prison. It was not possible to safely contain Williams in prison. Therefore the death penalty for Williams was licit.

Ani:

Very well stated.

I think the Death Penalty opponents are so wrapped up in the concept of Vengeance that they forget the necessity of PROTECTION.

I also think so many are so worried about the possibility of a single Innocent person being executed that they forget the DOZENS of INNOCENT people murdered directly and by contract by the convicted murderers and the DOZENS MORE who would be slaughteres if these people were allowed to stay alive.

The so-called “Bird-Man of Alcatraz” was responsible for the killings of 6 people while he was in jail for murder.

I recently helped bury a man who, as an ADA got a Death Penalty verdict for a particularly notorious criminal in the 1950’s. I’m possitive David did the right thing, and that what he did substantially protected the citizens of California from a murderous thug.

I think the last question is one we need to ask every opponent of the Death Penalty:

"Are you willing to take responsibility before God for the dozens of INNOCENT people who will be slaughtered by convicted murderers who will be kept alive if people like you have your way?"

I doubt any of them will answer.

In Christ, Michael

 

[GoodKnight1443]

As a Catholic who believes in the doctrineof the Church and the Culture of Life, Ilike so many of us struggle with this issue. Death Penalty? I have to say no. Let him out of Jail NO WAY! He was tried and convicted of a henous crime. Sadly if the Gov had granted him clemency that would have been a wedge for teh ACLU to get him out of jail. Williams knew very well what he was doing and how wrong it was.

too bad so many Hollywood celebs won;t speak out for the life of innocent re born babies rather than a convited murderer.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

GoodKnight1443:

As a Catholic who believes in the doctrineof the Church and the Culture of Life, Ilike so many of us struggle with this issue. Death Penalty? I have to say no. Let him out of Jail NO WAY! He was tried and convicted of a henous crime. Sadly if the Gov had granted him clemency that would have been a wedge for teh ACLU to get him out of jail. Williams knew very well what he was doing and how wrong it was.

too bad so many Hollywood celebs won;t speak out for the life of innocent re born babies rather than a convited murderer.

GoodKnight1443:

I also believe in the Doctrines of the Church. that’s why I quoted the scriptures from the Old Testament which commanded the SOCIETY to put the murderer to death.

I did a comparison on the way Pope John Paul II approached the Death Penalty, which he personal opposed, with the way he approached Abortion. which you mention in your post:

Re: Pope Benedict: God Sees Unborn Children as “Full and Complete” Humans - Post #2
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=1194585&postcount=2

*2266 The State’s effort to contain the spread of behaviors injurious to human rights and the fundamental rules of civil coexistence corresponds to the requirement of watching over the common good. Legitimate public authority has the right and duty to inflict penalties commensurate with the gravity of the crime. the primary scope of the penalty is to redress the disorder caused by the offense. When his punishment is voluntarily accepted by the offender, it takes on the value of expiation. Moreover, punishment, in addition to preserving public order and the safety of persons, has a medicinal scope: as far as possible it should contribute to the correction of the offender.67

**2267 The traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude, presupposing full ascertainment of the identity and responsibility of the offender, recourse to the death penalty, when this is the only practicable way to defend the lives of human beings effectively against the aggressor. ** *

vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P7Z.HTM

“Tookie” Williams, like so many other murderers continued to murder while he was in jail (At least 2 people, one a prison guard killed during a riot he started, and another, an “informant” murdered on his orders).

So, The issue isn’t just incarceration of the guilty, but it is also PROTECTION of the INNOCENT. Whatever we do must PROTECT THE INNOCENT. Placing someone in the General Population or on Death Row, while he still has contact with other inmates and compromized staff, does not provide that PROTECTION, because it did NOT provide that PROTECTION in the case of “Tookie” Williams.

We know from the violence against inmates and guards, as well as the “Hits” ordered by murderers in Pelican Bay and San Quentin, that the security measures in place at Pelican Bay and San Quentin have not been able to PROTECT the INNOCENT against the likes of “Tookie” Williams.

If Solitary Confinement with NO outside contact will PROTECT the INNOCENT from predators like “Tookie” Williams, then I will support that, NO matter how cruel and inhumane the ACLU and the APA say it is. If sending the Murderers to Mars would do that, I would support incarceration on the surface of Mars, provided we could control all communications to and from Mars and provide the PROTECTION I’m talking about. And, If the only way to insure to PROTECT the INNOCENT from Predators like “Tookie” Williams is the Death Penalty, then I’ll support the use of the Death Penalty, provided Safeguards are used to insure the Innocent aren’t executed with the guilty.

Remember, the Hollywood celebrities care more about the live s of the murderers than of their victims, and don’t believe that pre-born babies are human beings.So, they’re morally bankrupt.

In Christ, Michael

 

[Utah_Ken]

Traditional Ang:

Ken:

What I cited are COMMANDMENTS and were REQUIRED. What you cited are what we are to do as INDIVIDUALS. The two are completely different and should never be conflated or confused. Becuase, if I take those scriptures and apply them to SOCIETY, you can’t even send murderers to jail and can do NOTHING to protect yourself from them.

Are you prepared to do that? Are you prepared to leave your neighbors unprotected against the likes of “Tookie” Williams?

Please understand, the second you arrest “Tookie” Williams or place someone like him in jail, you’ve violated those scriptures, if you are insisting they are to be applied to SOCIETY and CRIMINAL LAW!

I’m not! The Talmud states that he who refuses to protect his community from those who would harm them are no better than infidels.

Regarding “Vengeance” i don’t believe ANY rational advocte of the Death Penalty is advocating its advocating it as a tool of vengeance. If we were, we would be advocating that the Penalty be done in as painful a way as possible, which we’re NOT!

This constant insistance that we want the Death Penaly for purposes of Vengeance is therefore a Red Herring and is False. Making false accusations about people and their motivations is also a violations of the commandments. I’d appreciate it if you would stop this.

Can I just ask a few questions: How important are the lives of those who will become victims of vicious murderers like “Tookie” Williams when they arrange to have them killed while they are behind bars? Aren’t those INNOCENT lives at least as important as the lives of the guilty murderers who are supposed to protect them against?

I want to make sure you understand this - Our laws do NOT allow for the kind of solitary confinement or complete security that would prevent someone such as “Tookie” Williams from either starting a deadly riot (which he did) or ordering a “hit” (which he also did) on a person who was ooutside the prison.

Given those are the actual circumstances, are you willing tto do whatever is necessary to PROTECT the INNOCENT? or, Will the lives of the guilty be more important to you than the lives of those who guard them and any other INNOCENTS they will kill while they are alive?

As I said, Death Penalty advocates are willing to take responsibility before God for the one or two Innocent people who might be executed in spite of all of our legal safeguards. Are you willing to take responsibility before God for the dozens of INNOCENT people who will be slaughtered by convicted murderers who will be kept alive if people like you have your way?

I think these are all fair questions.

In Christ, Michael

“REQUIRED COMMANDMENTS?” .Which ones?

You ask rhetorically, “Are you prepared to do that?” I pose the same question.

Leviticus 20:27 “A man or a woman who acts as a medium or fortune-teller shall be put to death by stoning; they have no one but themselves to blame for their death.” Leviticus 21:9
"A priest’s daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death.

Leviticus 24:16
whoever blasphemes the name of the LORD shall be put to death. The whole community shall stone him; alien and native alike must be put to death for blaspheming the LORD’S name.

Deuteronomy
25:11,12

"When two men are fighting and the wife of one intervenes to save her husband from the blows of his opponent, if she stretches out her hand and seizes the latter by his private parts, you shall chop off her hand without pity.

We seek to help build a culture of life in which our nation will no longer try to teach that killing is wrong by killing those who kill.

This cycle of violence diminishes all of us.

USCCB