Your Response to Those Who State You Cannot Be 100% Pro-Life & For the Death Penalty?

[vern_humphrey]

wabrams:

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.

I’m very familiar with the old Pennsylvania system – and how cruel and inhuman it was.

wabrams:

Prisoner’s in a strick, isolated enviroment don’t need regular medical check-ups.

Really?!?

They never get heart disease, diabetes, arthritis or cancer?

You got some documentation for that?

wabrams:

Even in theses old systems when a patient was led out of the cell, their hands were cuffed, legs shackeld, and had a type of brace around their neck connected to a long pole.

Just like in Marion – and Tommy Silverstein and his co-conspirators managed to kill two corrections officers on the same day.

wabrams:

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.

No, “one” commits a logical fallacy – and in the process diminishes the validity of one’s argument.http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon10.gif

 

[Prodigal_Son]

pnewton:

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.

If this is not the case, then you are not addressing a single person here, as no one is supporting vigilanteism.

I still say that any arguement that we should be forgiving and not judging as a society, through our court system, can be made to exclude all punishment as easy as the death penalty.

Huh?

I said in the post I referred to: “…the Church respects civil authority. Civil authority can punish crimes how it pleases. But, from a Catholic viewpoint, if the civil authority trespasses on the God-given right of a person to life, the civil authority is wrong. I’m not saying I have to vote on the basis of that wrong (I happen to think abortion is much more wrong). But the Catholic position is to oppose the death penalty.”

Civil authorities can punish crimes. It’s their right. Even with the death penalty. Civil authorities have no obligation to be merciful. But they can be merciful – and they ought to be, when it comes to the death penalty.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Prodigal_Son:

Venn –

Perhaps the Vatican is wrong on this, but I am arguing the Vatican’s position. I don’t know a ton about prisons. Perhaps there is no way to keep a murderer in the United States from killing again. If so, your position makes sense.

The Vatican is not saying the death penalty is never permissible.

Prodigal_Son:

But, if we err, we ought to err on the side of mercy.

How about a little mercy for a family wiped out by a killer on parole, who kidnapped and raped their children and murdered one of those children?

 

[Michael_Welter]

vern humphrey:

How about a little mercy for a family wiped out by a killer on parole, who kidnapped and raped their children and murdered one of those children?

The best thing we can do for that family is to make sure that the killer can never kill again. If that cannot be done within the prison system, then we are justified in putting the person to death. But if that person can be contained in such a way that they cannot kill again, then we should do that.

This is the teaching of the Church.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

vern humphrey:

How about a little mercy for a family wiped out by a killer on parole, who kidnapped and raped their children and murdered one of those children?

I have no mercy for the system that neglected its duty to hold that man accountable for his original crime. That system is an accomplice to the crime. Parole is a weak concept, and it acts (more often than not) as an incentive to crime.

 

[pnewton]

wabrams:

Which really stinks.

But it is still a legal reality that will be part of our society for the foreseeable future. The point of Catholic teaching leaving the death penalty subject to guidelines as opposed an absolute prohibition is to allow for practical judgement to take precedent of academic judgement.

Since you have mentioned studies, would you happen to know of how the numbers of death through prison violence correlate to the rate of executions? You mentioned that the above example was a rarity, but not how rare, or how you know it is rare? Is it more rare than execution? (It’s not like we have mass executions) If it is rare, then how many more murders are acceptable to avoid executing a murderer?

One can see both the trees and be aware of the forest. Please do not become an elitist that thing academic knowledge trumps practical experience. Both have their place.

 

[pnewton]

Prodigal_Son:

Huh?

I said in the post I referred to: .

I am sorry. I looked at the post I quoted and all the ones previous. I didn’t catch your subsequent post clarifying what you said.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

pnewton:

I am sorry. I looked at the post I quoted and all the ones previous. I didn’t catch your subsequent post clarifying what you said.

That’s cool. This thread is pretty confusing.

 

[wabrams]

vern humphrey:

I’m very familiar with the old Pennsylvania system – and how cruel and inhuman it was.

It was the overseers that were cruel, not the system itself.
vern humphrey:

Really?!?

They never get heart disease, diabetes, arthritis or cancer?

You got some documentation for that?

SO we should be screening inmates every year for these problems? Better than what most Americans get.
vern humphrey:

Just like in Marion – and Tommy Silverstein and his co-conspirators managed to kill two corrections officers on the same day.

I don’t know about his legs, but his hands were handcuffed and a guard let Silverstein talk to a prisoner on the way back from the shower. The prisoner had a key on him and uncuffed Silverstein. Why Silverstein was allowed to stop and talk to a fellow prisoner for that long is beyond me, or even allowed to stop and talk at all.
vern humphrey:

No, “one” commits a logical fallacy – and in the process diminishes the validity of one’s argument.http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon10.gif

No, you’re just talking out of both sides of your mouth. I’ve noticed you’ve got a real talent for it and use it often to try and steer a topic into a completely different direction. Then when you get called on it, you start spouting off about how it’s an “illogical fallacy” that someone called you out.

 

[vern_humphrey]

From capmag.com/article.asp?ID=2272

At least 98 killers now on Death Row were already in prison when they murdered their victims; at least 37 others were prison escapees. Locking up murderers guarantees nothing. Some will always escape and murder again. Some will kill behind bars. In Pennsylvania last week, two vicious thugs serving long sentences for gruesome murders were convicted of attempting to butcher a fellow inmate. Using a smuggled razor, they slashed his throat from ear to ear, severing his trachea. Miraculously, he survived. Other victims don’t.

 

[vern_humphrey]

wabrams:

It was the overseers that were cruel, not the system itself.

Re-read your textbook. It was the system. Total solitary isolation is the cruelest of all punishments.

wabrams:

SO we should be screening inmates every year for these problems? Better than what most Americans get.

What, you don’t have a yearly check-up?

wabrams:

It I don’t know about his legs, but his hands were handcuffed and a guard let Silverstein talk to a prisoner on the way back from the shower. The prisoner had a key on him and uncuffed Silverstein. Why Silverstein was allowed to stop and talk to a fellow prisoner for that long is beyond me, or even allowed to stop and talk at all.

This illustrates the point – if you were in charge of a killer like Silverstein, you’d have to constantly remember, he’s watching you – all the time. And when you’re not there, he’s thinking about how to exploit any error you make.

Now, I note someone said they’d volunteer to guard Silverstein “in a heartbeat.”

My heart has beat several times since then – and he still hasn’t volunteered.

wabrams:

It No, you’re just talking out of both sides of your mouth. I’ve noticed you’ve got a real talent for it and use it often to try and steer a topic into a completely different direction. Then when you get called on it, you start spouting off about how it’s an “illogical fallacy” that someone called you out.

My, aren’t we nasty and ungentlemanly today.http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon12.gif

When you use logical fallacies, expect to be called on it – don’t sulk, or pout. Just say, “sorry.”

 

[pnewton]

Prodigal_Son:

That’s cool. This thread is pretty confusing.

Isn’t that the truth! I have seldom seen one move so fast. I bet I could really be confusing now and say that I am not a proponent of the death penalty. I am just not opposed to it. It is on of the most difficult subjects for me, because I do know of a few (a very few) that will always be a danger to others, inside or oustide of prison. The part of me that wants to protect others as much as possible favors it.

On the other hand, I know that society it has been over-used and over-applied. There would be a real good done society if we respected life so much that we would go to extremes (even what the courts have called cruelty) to protect these terrible criminals (in a Francis Schaffer way). But this gain is negligible to that which could be ours by abolishing abortion.

 

[wabrams]

vern humphrey:

Re-read your textbook. It was the system. Total solitary isolation is the cruelest of all punishments.

No, the death penalty is. Nowing when you will die and having to wait for it is the worst.
vern humphrey:

What, you don’t have a yearly check-up?

No, I do not.
vern humphrey:

This illustrates the point – if you were in charge of a killer like Silverstein, you’d have to constantly remember, he’s watching you – all the time. And when you’re not there, he’s thinking about how to exploit any error you make.

Now, I note someone said they’d volunteer to guard Silverstein “in a heartbeat.”

My heart has beat several times since then – and he still hasn’t volunteered.

So, you would agree the system we have now works? Guards get lazy, people die.
vern humphrey:

My, aren’t we nasty and ungentlemanly today.http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon12.gif

When you use logical fallacies, expect to be called on it – don’t sulk, or pout. Just say, “sorry.”

Whatever you say Vern. You’ve demonstrated countless times that when you have nothing better to say, you try and change the subject. Then you sit there and pout and try to make youreself look high and mighty instead of saying “Sorry.”

 

[estesbob]

Your Response to Those Who State You Cannot Be 100% Pro-Life & For the Death Penalty?

I am actually against the Death Penalty but the Pro-Aborts often attack Pro-Lifers by stating you cannot be 100% Pro-Life if you are for the Death Penalty. What is the best answer to give them??

I know with abortion the unborn baby is always innocent. With Capital Punishment, the criminal has chosen to do severe wrong and pays for it through the Death Penalty.

I believe the Catholic Church has exceptions which make the Capital Punishment OK. How would you respond back to the Pro-Aborts??

First you need to realize that the pro-abortion people who attack us are not interested in a debate. Their goal is to change the subject. There simply is no moral equivalence between the execution of 100 or so convicted murders a year and state sanctioned elimination of 1.3 million children a year.

 

[David_Zampino]

estesbob:

First you need to realize that the pro-abortion people who attack us are not interested in a debate. Their goal is to change the subject. There simply is no moral equivalence between the execution of 100 or so convicted murders a year and state sanctioned elimination of 1.3 million children a year.

EXACTLY!!! And EXCELLENT point!!!

 

[estesbob]

Brad:

What does this question have to do with George Bush? Are you suggesting it is ok to vote for someone that is 10% pro-life?

I doubt if this is the case here but I know lots of Catholics who vote for Kerry stating that he was as pro-life as Bush becuase he opposed, in most cases, the death penalty. There is no comparison.

 

[vern_humphrey]

wabrams:

No, the death penalty is. Nowing when you will die and having to wait for it is the worst.

So say you. People who actually worked in those prisons, and those who studied them while they were in operation say different – and they were not ignorant of the effect of the death penalty.

wabrams:

No, I do not.

Do you smoke? Are you overweight? Has anyone in your family died of heart disease, cancer, diabetes?

wabrams:

So, you would agree the system we have now works? Guards get lazy, people die.

Your last sentence refutes your first sentence.

 

[pnewton]

estesbob:

First you need to realize that the pro-abortion people who attack us are not interested in a debate. Their goal is to change the subject. There simply is no moral equivalence between the execution of 100 or so convicted murders a year and state sanctioned elimination of 1.3 million children a year.

Bravo! Cut right to the chase and back to the intitial post.

 

[wabrams]

pnewton:

Since you have mentioned studies, would you happen to know of how the numbers of death through prison violence correlate to the rate of executions? You mentioned that the above example was a rarity, but not how rare, or how you know it is rare? Is it more rare than execution? (It’s not like we have mass executions) If it is rare, then how many more murders are acceptable to avoid executing a murderer?

Let me see, the prison population has increased but the number of persons executed has just slightly decreased.
ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance.htm

Homicide rates in prison (state and local) are 3.5 per 100,000.
ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/shsplj.htm

3.15 allegations per 100,000 of sexual violence.
ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/svrca04.htm

That’s just what I found on the fly. There’s a lot more detailed information if you want me to look it up.

pnewton:

One can see both the trees and be aware of the forest. Please do not become an elitist that thing academic knowledge trumps practical experience. Both have their place.

I believe they compliment each other.

 

[wabrams]

vern humphrey:

So say you. People who actually worked in those prisons, and those who studied them while they were in operation say different – and they were not ignorant of the effect of the death penalty.

Depends on what study you read, and more importantly, the bias you have when you look at the data.
vern humphrey:

Do you smoke? Are you overweight? Has anyone in your family died of heart disease, cancer, diabetes?

Smoke, definately not overweight, family members have had cancer and diabetes.
vern humphrey:

Your last sentence refutes your first sentence.

No the system works, people get lazy and do not properly use the system.