So when are you reporting in to Leavenworth?http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon12.gif
Ya think he might have, eh? http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon12.gif
That’s it – in the last resort, always blame the victims.
You bet your little blue booties there are. Lots of 'em.
You know this how? I have known several people that are, and always will be a danger to others, even behind prison bars. There is a reason why the Catechism mentions the guidelines to be followed and not the specific countries to which it applies. I know few in the field of corrections (no one actually) that has confidence in our ability to 100% safeguard society against the most dangerous prisoners without the death penalty. Most that believe we have reached this level of safety are opposed to the death penalty in all instances and work backward from that position.
A quotation in response:
None of us are innocent.
Let me clarify what I meant: stricter methods that make it to where there is zero human contact.
So you make a statement that has nothing to do with this discussion.
I know because I worked around it and studied it for 4 years.
Well, I’ve Gearge Bush being referred to as a pro-life president. In fact, before the last election, National Right to Life endorsed him as a “great pro-life president”. And he is not pro-life, he is anti-abortion. I would hope that ALL catholics vote pro-life.
Explain to me how that applies only to the death penalty?
lol,
As a guy who has studied and worked around it for four years, tell me how you get zero human contact?
Quite the contrary. I pointed out that you were arguing a logical fallacy (“False Dilemma.”) When you do that, you throw your whole argument into doubt.
“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.’” - The Catechism of the Catholic Church
Then we should not even have prison? Life in prisonment is also meting out punishment.
If those judicial actions are taken by the Church, then yes, you ought to oppose them.
Not to mention federal courts mandates ruling on cruel and unusual punishment that will always nullify most dreamers idea of what prison can be.
See my previous post. *We * don’t mete out punishment; the authorities do. But we ought to see that the authorities do so justly.
You’re wrong.
So should you.
Look into the old Quaker, Pennsylvania, and New York prison systems. Some of these systems had a cell with it’s own courtyard, and if the cell needed to be entered they would lock the prisoner in the courtyard.
Quite contrary, you made a statement, on a thread about the death penalty, that even persons on parole commit murder. You never elaborated on this, so one draws a conclusion that you are implying that we should execute all prisoners. If not, please further explain your statement.
Which really stinks.
I think that’s awesome. But sometimes you can’t see the forest for the trees, which is why the university and program I studied under did research for the prison.
I did read you post. You did not mention “authorities”, but rather “man’s portion”. You point seemed to be that humankind was not to be the one’s deciding punishment, even in the guise of legitmate authority.
The vast majority of the time these prisoners are contained. Is it reasonable to apply the CCC with regards to executions being justified for the occaisional error that results in a CO being killed? I think the Catechism in proper application will exclude the US prison system in justification of capital punishment. Potential fluke variables do not justify mass executions. It would however be just to create better security in prisons. There is always a way.
