Page 3 of 9
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:45 am
by DIRESTRAITS
reverend_kyle wrote:Kill_Schmitty wrote:btownmeggy wrote:Kill_Schmitty wrote:I want to ask the people who appose capital punishment this: If a man walked into your house and chopped up one of your loved one (spouse, parent, kid etc.) would you not want the same fate for him?
Do you seriously think people who oppose capital punishment have never contemplated such a scenario?
no i believe they have i just want to know what they thought about it
I believe we should not thrive to make ourselves as bad as the person who did that.
Two wrongs dont make a right.
Using this logic, Locking someone up would not be justified either, as it is wrong, just as killing someone is
Re: ??
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:45 am
by luns101
jay_a2j wrote:The OT also says "eye for an eye and tooth for tooth" whereas Jesus tells us to "turn the other cheek".
We are to follow the laws of Government but no law is above God's laws. (the government has abortion legal...so is it then "right" in God's eyes?)
Depending on the individual? Life without parole for most hainess crimes.
Jay, the eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth was a reference to Hebrew law and the administration of justice. The quote about "turning the other cheek" is in the context of those who will suffer for the kingdom of God from the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus was not talking about abandoning the Hebrew law.
As far as the abortion being legal and if it is God's will, God gives all nations the opportunity to repent. It doesn't mean He is approving of the evil things they practice. Even Ninevah got a last chance, and they did things a lot worse than practice abortion.
Re: ??
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:47 am
by DIRESTRAITS
jay_a2j wrote:DIRESTRAITS wrote:If capital punishment is not the correct penalty for those who take innocent life from another human being, then what is the correct punishment?
Depending on the individual? Life without parole for most hainess crimes.
please respond to the last line of my previous post Jay[/quote]
I did.[/quote]
lol, I didn't write that, someone else did. I meant the one about war. How can you say taking 1 life is bad no matter what, but not thousands of lives?
[/quote]
Re: ??
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:50 am
by luns101
flashleg8 wrote:Ordinary people do not kill. We need to ask who is doing the killings and why?
They don't ordinarily kill because they know that the threat of capital punishment is there. The reason they kill is because they are evil.
flashleg8 wrote:Killings are usually could be carried out by people who have a mental problem - whether a temporary moment of insanity/rage, something from their upbringing/earlier life, or from a mental illness. All these could be treated with psychiatry, whether counselling or prescribing medicine.
That still doesn't bring back the innocent life that they robbed from this earth. There needs to be a penalty for the crime, not the motivation of the crime.
flashleg8 wrote:Or are the killers doing this because they are in someway anti-social and have no link to normal society? In which case we should attempt to show them the errors of their actions and reintegrate them with our community through a program of re-education.
Be my guest on being the one to sit down next to a murderer and trying to show him the "error of his ways". You can also be the one to have this "reintegrated" murderer live next door to yourself.
Re: ??
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:59 am
by beezer
btownmeggy wrote:Ooh, so this is one of the issues in which you're supposed to believe the Old Testament, not the New Testament. Sorry, it's hard for me to keep it straight when the Old Testament is right and when the New Testament is.
Well, if you don't believe that the Bible is correct then I wouldn't expect you be able to distinguish between the civil laws and the spiritual laws that it prescribes. You would have to get beyond the bias that it is false in the first place. I hope that doesn't sound sarcastic because it's not meant to be. I'm simply saying that if you accepted its premise as being correct then you would want to do further study and examine the laws for yourself.
btownmeggy wrote:My answer: I'm not sure there is an appropriate "penalty". I just don't know. While much evidences demonstrates that the presence or lack of the death penalty has no effect on murder rates, I do think that the possibility of imprisonment seems to deter people from committing many crimes, though usually not those caused by passion or an apparent necessity. I definitely don't think that there should be no repercussions for people who commit the sort of crimes that harm other people. Reciprocal MURDER is not the answer, for the moral and practical reasons that are being brought up repeatedly in this thread.
Well, at least you're being honest. I watched the O'Reilly factor once where he said he would work convicted murderers to death up in the Alaskan refuge area. He said he would make thier lives so miserable that they would beg for the death penalty. That sounds good on the surface, but that sounds more like revenge to me. What do you think about his position?
I disagree that capital punishment is murder. The murder was committed by the original law-breaker. The state is killing the murderer in order to prevent it from happening again. I distinguish between murder and killing.
Re: ??
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 12:59 am
by flashleg8
luns101 wrote:flashleg8 wrote:Ordinary people do not kill. We need to ask who is doing the killings and why?
They don't ordinarily kill because they know that the threat of capital punishment is there. The reason they kill is because they are evil.
I don't really believe in the concept of evil. I feel any persons actions can be explained by their environment. I don't think anyone is inherently evil.
luns101 wrote:flashleg8 wrote:Killings are usually could be carried out by people who have a mental problem - whether a temporary moment of insanity/rage, something from their upbringing/earlier life, or from a mental illness. All these could be treated with psychiatry, whether counselling or prescribing medicine.
That still doesn't bring back the innocent life that they robbed from this earth. There needs to be a penalty for the crime, not the motivation of the crime.
Nothing will bring back that life. Retribution is useless. Rehabilitation will attempt to bring the criminal back into society where they could contribute again.
luns101 wrote:flashleg8 wrote:Or are the killers doing this because they are in someway anti-social and have no link to normal society? In which case we should attempt to show them the errors of their actions and reintegrate them with our community through a program of re-education.
Be my guest on being the one to sit down next to a murderer and trying to show him the "error of his ways". You can also be the one to have this "reintegrated" murderer live next door to yourself.
Obviously it would be done by trained professionals. I would quite happily give a criminal a second chance after it was shown that he/she was rehabilitated.
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 1:01 am
by Jenos Ridan
jnd94 wrote:Im against it. the state has no right to kill people, no matter what they did. Whatever happened to "no cruel and unusual punishmnet" in the constitution? I dont know about if they deserve it or not, but state geovernment doesnt have the power to kill someone just cuz they may have been convicted.
And wat about if the courts make a mistake? a innocent guy will be killed because the didnt recheck the DNA, or something like that.
Last time I checked, the US Constitution says treason is punishable by death.
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 1:07 am
by b.k. barunt
Damn jay, you really jumped out of character on that one, i mean it's strange to find you in the camp of the liberals. I can't support it, because of the way the justice system favors the rich, and their ineptitude, which would inevitably mean innocent people would sometimes be executed, but i would be hypocritical if i didn't add an addenda to that. I have 3 younger brothers, who i always protected when we were growing up. If someone killed one of them, or my son - or even my wife (heh), i would have to hunt them down and kill them. I would of course have to know that it was not accidental. I don't think it would be right, but i know that's what i would have to do in order to sleep at night.
Re: ??
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 1:08 am
by luns101
flashleg8 wrote:I don't really believe in the concept of evil. I feel any persons actions can be explained by their environment. I don't think anyone is inherently evil.
Flashleg, you are making the argument that when the state administers capital punishment...that they are "morally wrong" to do so. You may not be using the term "evil" but you are essentially saying the same thing.
You have also claimed in other threads that things are "morally wrong". So you do believe in a concept of good and evil.
As far as saying that people are not inherently evil, that is just a place where we will have to disagree I guess. The Bible says that people are sinners by nature.
I would submit to you that if you stuck some kids in a room together with some toys you would soon find them fighting over them. Even if they had no need for the toys it wouldn't be long before you would hear one of them yell the timeless cry, "MINE!"
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 1:09 am
by jay_a2j
War..... in defense of your country? Yes. Hmmm this is good....I'm questioning my own beliefs. (This is why I love debate)
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 1:12 am
by reverend_kyle
DIRESTRAITS wrote:reverend_kyle wrote:Kill_Schmitty wrote:btownmeggy wrote:Kill_Schmitty wrote:I want to ask the people who appose capital punishment this: If a man walked into your house and chopped up one of your loved one (spouse, parent, kid etc.) would you not want the same fate for him?
Do you seriously think people who oppose capital punishment have never contemplated such a scenario?
no i believe they have i just want to know what they thought about it
I believe we should not thrive to make ourselves as bad as the person who did that.
Two wrongs dont make a right.
Using this logic, Locking someone up would not be justified either, as it is wrong, just as killing someone is
No it wouldn't, there is a HUGGGGGGGGGGE moral line between locking someone up and taking away their life.
A suggestion
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 1:12 am
by luns101
jay_a2j wrote:War..... in defense of your country? Yes. Hmmm this is good....I'm questioning my own beliefs. (This is why I love debate)
Hey Jay, although we disagree on this one can I recommend a book to you?
It's called CHRISTIAN ETHICS by Norman Geisler. It covers all sides of ethics debates from a Christian perspective. Although Geisler takes his own position, he is pretty fair to all sides of the argument in presenting their justification for their positions.
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 1:12 am
by DIRESTRAITS
jay_a2j wrote:War..... in defense of your country? Yes. Hmmm this is good....I'm questioning my own beliefs. (This is why I love debate)
But what justifies 'defense of your country'? I think that killing is morally ok so ling as it is justified
Also, to the creator of this thread, feel free to add the quote from my uncle to your paper. It could help you by having a quote from a legal professional, IMHO
Re: ??
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 1:12 am
by Jenos Ridan
luns101 wrote:As far as saying that people are not inherently evil, that is just a place where we will have to disagree I guess. The Bible says that people are sinners by nature.
I would submit to you that if you stuck some kids in a room together with some toys you would soon find them fighting over them. Even if they had no need for the toys it wouldn't be long before you would hear one of them yell the timeless cry, "MINE!"
Oh so very true. That is the better part of the problem; human nature.
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 1:13 am
by DIRESTRAITS
reverend_kyle wrote:DIRESTRAITS wrote:reverend_kyle wrote:Kill_Schmitty wrote:btownmeggy wrote:Kill_Schmitty wrote:I want to ask the people who appose capital punishment this: If a man walked into your house and chopped up one of your loved one (spouse, parent, kid etc.) would you not want the same fate for him?
Do you seriously think people who oppose capital punishment have never contemplated such a scenario?
no i believe they have i just want to know what they thought about it
I believe we should not thrive to make ourselves as bad as the person who did that.
Two wrongs dont make a right.
so 2 wrongs do make a right, so long as the second one is less of a wrong?
Using this logic, Locking someone up would not be justified either, as it is wrong, just as killing someone is
No it wouldn't, there is a HUGGGGGGGGGGE moral line between locking someone up and taking away their life.
Re: A suggestion
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 1:17 am
by jay_a2j
luns101 wrote:jay_a2j wrote:War..... in defense of your country? Yes. Hmmm this is good....I'm questioning my own beliefs. (This is why I love debate)
Hey Jay, although we disagree on this one can I recommend a book to you?
It's called CHRISTIAN ETHICS by Norman Geisler. It covers all sides of ethics debates from a Christian perspective. Although Geisler takes his own position, he is pretty fair to all sides of the argument in presenting their justification for their positions.
Sure can. And I wrote it down. Thanks.
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 1:20 am
by Jenos Ridan
DIRESTRAITS wrote:jay_a2j wrote:War..... in defense of your country? Yes. Hmmm this is good....I'm questioning my own beliefs. (This is why I love debate)
But what justifies 'defense of your country'? I think that killing is morally ok so ling as it is justified
Also, to the creator of this thread, feel free to add the quote from my uncle to your paper. It could help you by having a quote from a legal professional, IMHO
Oops, I fudged it. Let me try again....
If your country came under attack and you felt that the reason for the attack is valid, then 'defending your land' is not a valid reason. The problem, if you don't have a choice, then what? What if your nation was the aggressor but you felt the reasons were vaild? I don't see how hard-and-fast rules can be drawn since the lines are so blurred.
The obvious proof
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 1:46 am
by luns101
Flashleg8, are you sure that you would still like to argue your position that nobody is inherently evil...sigh. You have forced my hand to present proof.
Yes, it's David Hasselhoff!
Re: The obvious proof
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 2:01 am
by Jenos Ridan
luns101 wrote:Flashleg8, are you sure that you would still like to argue your position that nobody is inherently evil...sigh. You have forced my hand to present proof.
Yes, it's David Hasselhoff!
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 2:18 am
by b.k. barunt
luns, you are a very sick man.
Anyway, killing in self defence is justified. For us to attack Afghanistan was justified. For us to attack Iraq . . .
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 3:29 am
by Jenos Ridan
b.k. barunt wrote:luns, you are a very sick man.
Anyway, killing in self defence is justified. For us to attack Afghanistan was justified. For us to attack Iraq . . .
Was a poorly executed (NO PUN INTENDED!) copy-cat operation similar to Afghanistan.
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 3:52 am
by Anarchy Ninja
capital punishment. It saves strain on the economy by putting someone who has commited an atrocious act underground, however i strongly dissagree with nearly all forms of violence (save defence) and i dont think that capital punisment is at all morally correct, imagine if you got an innocent man?
"sorry we thought he was evil at the time" just wont cut it for pretty much any family
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 4:04 am
by got tonkaed
i happen to think btownmeggy has had a bunch of really great posts throughout this thread. Im not sure we can weigh justice in terms of absolutes because im not sure for something like murder, you ever really can get it right. Certainly wanting to kill the other person may make sense to some, but i dont think that ever really honors the life of the person who died to begin with. Nor does it do anything to bring them back. The idea clearly is meant to comfort those who are still alive, but i know that if i was murdered, i wouldnt think (not that im really thinking at this point eh) that by killing someone else youve done anything to honor the life that i tried to live.
As it has been mentioned, putting people to death is a very expensive practice. More expensive in many cases than keeping someone locked up for a life sentence. So im not sure how we are doing some great fiscal good by deciding to put more people to death. I also think for anyone not a psychopath (as they wont have any connections to conscience,) spending the rest of your life removed of your freedom forced to be constantly reminded of what you have done, is a much more exactive revenge than simply killing the person out of anger. Still its not like i think this type of punishment is more right so to speak, but if there is a long continum of justice, i think this is slightly farther down the line. I dont believe there will ever be a punishment for killing someone that should feel right, because that just takes the focus off the lives we have lost.
I dont feel in a civilized society we should accept killing people out of it. The problem is so multifaceted that a simple answer to the issue, like putting someone to death shows a lack of willingness to take on all sides, another hallmark of a society that is refusing to be civilized.
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 5:09 am
by Joep the 2nd
Anarkistsdream wrote:I am for it...
Sorry, but there is already an overpopulation problem on this planet... As we continue to force ourselves to live in a smaller and smaller area and destroy our natural habitats and environments, something has to be done...
Better to weed out the baddies.
i agree
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 6:21 am
by Anarchist
Eye for an eye
Granted im not much for the false offenses(example statutory Rape when they are dating.) I think punishment is soft, but the crimes are ussually wrong aswell(No punishment unless its a violent offense,with a few exceptions im not thinking of right now) I believe that the system accidently causes many crimes, aswell as additional charges(personal use and intent to sell, should be legal anyway)
