|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/17/2008 3:22:22 PM
|
|
|
bzirk
Posts: 2848
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Where the deer and antelope play
Status: offline
|
quote:
Romans 5
12Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned--
13for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
14Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.
But the Lord has made a way for us not to suffer a spiritual death by being made alive in Him through faith in Him
quote:
Romans 5
15But the free gift is not like the transgression. For if by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many.
16The gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned; for on the one hand the judgment arose from one transgression resulting in condemnation, but on the other hand the free gift arose from many transgressions resulting in justification.
17For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.
(emphasis mine)
Notice that the gift is not physical life (as we know it). But rather it is the gift of righteousness. We're all still under the penalty of a physical death. That is what is exacted with capital punishment -- physical death. No man can deny someone spiritual life. The individual who rejects the Lord is the one who condemns himself to spiritual death, so that no one can lay blame for their damnation to anyone else.
It's also interesting to reflect on the Lord submitting Himself to this death penalty that He instituted in order that we might have access to His righteousness:
quote:
Hebrews 9
27And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment,
28so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him.
(emphasis mine)
_____________________________
may the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, so you will abound in hope by the power of the Holy Spirit. Romans 15:13
Great quote: I just ain't God and don't know it all. -- SonInMe1
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/17/2008 10:59:38 PM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 5940
Joined: 4/15/2005
From: Northern Califonria
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: fiat_lux
You're right. And on the level I deal with them, I take the safer option by deciding in favour of life rather than in favour of death. God did not explicitly grant "pardons" in any of those cases -
If not a pardon so to speak what did He grant? Of course I am speaking in the temparol sense...
quote:
it's just that the question of killing them never came up. Indeed, he seemed to expect that others would want to execute Cain, and agreed to protect Cain, but apparently didn't tell anyone else about this "pardon," as you describe it.
I believe we who have His word have the luxary of a slight insight to the inner working of God regarding His "pardons" of those you mentioned... Of course one could consider that David was dealt a blow far greater than his own death, in that God took his son from him, something he had to live with, and given what Paul endured for the sake of Christ and the fact he was shown it all prior... Ouch...
quote:
If you acknowledge that in some cases God may in fact wish someone to live, how will you or I determine in what case this may or may not apply? Personally I prefer to err on the side of caution where human life is concerned.
Well... I know I can defend myself and my family up to the point of taking life, and as well it's clear God ordained the state to do for those who justly deserve it...
quote:
I do look elsewhere and find the subject equally unresolved. And again, as I've said, the OT scripture related to a specific relationship between Israel and God. Even if we were to take Romans 13 as you have taken it, the Israel-God relationship went far beyond that. I don't remember seeing anything in the OT about a standard of behaviour for governments in general.
The only huge double standard in this country regarding the death pentaly for murder is that we allow women to murder children in the womb. Yet that doesn't remove the fact that those who take life unlawfully deserve to be put to death...
quote:
That's because I'm trying to harmonize what at first glance seem to be divergent teachings. In 1 Samuel 8, for example, God explicitly describes the creation of a government in Israel as a rejection of him.
I see your point, but we are not Israel in that God didn't establish the United States in the manner He did Israel...
quote:
At most the purpose is to maintain order. Precisely how the government goes about maintaining order is unclear, except that part of doing so is that the government possesses a sword. This then leads us into a discussion, presumably, of in which cases the sword is justified and in which it is not, which leads to your objection that:
What is cloudy about the following?
Romans 13:4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
I submit that murder is evil... You have a verse to deny that?
quote:
What says I can't point out that the bible clearly states the just punishment for murder is death... The state doesn't have to put folks to death for everything the bible calls for in order to put folks to death for murder... That's your personal criteria...
quote:
The problem is, you've decided that because the Bible says the government to put to death murderers, therefore it's okay for the government to do only that.
What does the bible say the government should do with them? And citing God's choice to pardon David, Paul, Moses and whomever isn't a viable answer... His purpose for doing so is beyond what He ordained the civil government to do...
quote:
But my point is that we have to look at the Biblical law, if we're going to look at the Old Testament, and Paul, for one, is pretty clear that we can't just arbitrarily pick and choose which laws to follow and which ones not to.
It's not about arbitrarily picking and choosing, I am happy that they got at least one thing right...
quote:
So, if as you suggest, morality and obligation demand that governments put to death murderers, then by the same token morality and obligation demand that governments put to death offenders under a variety of other Old Testament laws. Now, if that's in fact your position, then I withdraw my objection.
I wouldn't take issue with the government honoring the word of God... How can I or anyone else who believes in it?
quote:
The Roman empire, under which Paul was writing, prescribed the death penalty for a variety of offences other than murder. I suppose we could object if some of those were brought up today, too - but under the principles of Romans 13, you're basically saying you wouldn't object to the government punishing anyone for anything, since Romans 13 doesn't provide an outlet for opposing an unjust government. At least according to your interpretation.
It's not an assumption at all. The plain fact of the matter is that when Paul wrote Romans 13, he was writing about a Roman government which was not Christian, and he was writing to Roman Christians who were not in government. It's for this reason that I say that Paul writes, he writes about us as Christians relating to a non-Christian government.
quote:
So perhaps the precise teaching in Romans 13 wouldn't apply to us, for example, who live in a very different political system and do have some political influence, at least in terms of voting. There is, however, a very great difference between Paul's question in Acts 24-25, which you note - that is, that we should submit to the government even if the penalty for doing so is death - and the question I thought was asked, which was whether, as a Christian, we support the death penalty in our societies. Submission and support are rather different creatures.
What is wrong with supporting what God says is just and right?
quote:
In my opinion it is rather difficult to respect and love someone while I take their life from them.
Why? One can do their duty with of love and or respect... I could work on death row and treat someone with love and respect... Pray for them, treat them with respect and walk them to the chair...There is nothing sinful or ungodly about dealing with people justly... Of course if one were to gleem joy from it that would be another issue and I submit that anyone that claims Christ and deals with people on this level and doesn't thank God daily for His mercy each and every day has issues... Certaintly is should be cause for inner reflection...
quote:
And Romans 12 tells me not to deal with someone "in regards to their deeds," at least if I understand what you mean here correctly, but rather to love and care for them regardless. It is God's to "avenge" and "repay" and so on.
I'm not pointing fingers at anyone. God is God. He has powers and privileges that I do not. I accept this.
When the civil government(who God ordained as His minister for those who do evil) justly puts someone to death ultimately God is the one who put the person to death...
quote:
The difficulty is, the plain reading of Romans 13 as you've taken it seems to suggest that governments don't do such "evil" acts.
That's your conclusion, not mine...
quote:
For example, it states that "for rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong"; further, if one wants to be "free," one must "do what is right" and then the governments will "commend" you.
I have to assume that Paul is reasoning towards another end than a universal philosophy of government here, because I know that governments have punished those who "do good," and certainly haven't commended them, for example governments have punished and not commended people for being Christian. I have to interpret Romans 13 as leading in some other direction because otherwise I fear I would be in danger of calling the Bible wrong on this issue, and that I will not do.
The failure of government to abide by what God calls for doesn't remove what He calls them to do... When Christian don't always do what God commands, does that remove His commaned to obey Him? No...
quote:
The context of Romans 13, as you have interpreted it, says that governments commend those who do good. It doesn't say governments should or might or even can commend those who do good; it says that governments do. This would not be a prescription for right behaviour; it would be an observation at most.
It's how things should be.... It's the standard... Failure to meet the standard doesn't remove it....
quote:
He did not say, however, whether a Christian in the position of the governor ought to administer that death.
For him to willingly submit to it isn't any different... Something that is just and right in the eyes of God cannot be wrong, even if it's justly taking the life of a person who did something worthy of the giving up his or her life...
quote:
If the question, however, is whether I as a Christian, were I in such a position of authority should kill people, then in my opinion the answer is no. I would not, for example, consider my actions as right and blameless were I to kill Paul or even Jesus, yet both - along with plenty of other martyrs - were legally executed.
You argument assume that what is legal is right in the eyes of God...Both Christ and Pilate knew that He was innocent and Christ made it clear what Pilate was doing was sinful... Yet the thief who was promise Paradise stated and rightly so that he was recieving his just due reward for his deeds... It wasn't the act of putting someone to death that was at issue with Christ is was that He was innocent and Pilate new it and even proclaimed it...
quote:
In some posts you seem to be suggesting that the death penalty powers implied in Romans 13 are good specifically in the context of murder, but if that's the case, then I'm wondering on what Biblical basis we limit government powers only to murder cases.
I speak of murder because it's for the most part the only crime this country will put a person to death for...
John
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/18/2008 5:15:56 PM
|
|
|
SinnerSaved
Posts: 318
Joined: 10/28/2007
From: Belfast, N. Ireland
Status: offline
|
We do not have the death penalty in the UK.
A pity.
I'm for it.
_____________________________
"Dance like nobody's watching; love like you've never been hurt. Sing like nobody's listening; live like it's heaven on earth."
Mark Twain
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/19/2008 7:22:46 AM
|
|
|
tracydolls
Posts: 1839
Joined: 3/30/2008
Status: offline
|
Dna has proven too many people innocent.
I shudder to think of all those that are already dead that we're innocent.
We should get rid of it. ASAP.
_____________________________
Rev 3:17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/19/2008 9:26:34 AM
|
|
|
JimboFletch
Posts: 6364
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tracydolls
Dna has proven too many people innocent.
I shudder to think of all those that are already dead that we're innocent.
I've asked this of others but never get a reply: Can you name 5 people executed that DNA has proven were innocent after death?
It generally takes 20 - 25 years after someone is sentenced to death and they actually are executed. That is an awful lot of time and appeals to insure that justice is carried out and not just the wishes of some blood-thirsty judge, DA, and jury of 12 people.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/19/2008 9:34:08 AM
|
|
|
JimboFletch
Posts: 6364
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: WesP
I have another question or two. How many people have been executed in the past 40 years? How many murders have been committed in that time? Does anyone see a problem in this?
According to the Murder Clock site:
Murders to Executions
672,185 to 1,099
That's 611 Murders per Execution
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/19/2008 10:43:25 AM
|
|
|
upNORTder
Posts: 205
Joined: 7/20/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
There is nothing in the bible to say the death penalty is not just... It calls for it for various sins/crimes... In the context of this thread we are talking about the unlawful taking of life and the bible is painfully clear the just punishment for murder is death at the hands of the civil government, ordained by God for that very purpose...
As Christians we have been freed from the death penalty that hung over us. As a Christian, I want everyone to have every chance to hear God's word and repent. If you execute soimeone, there chance is over. I would much rather that person be locked up for life. That way they have that chance to find God and forgivness.
The main object of the death penalty should be to make sure that the murderer cannot murder again, a life sentence serves that purpose.
If you are looking for vengence where you don't have to get your hands dirty, than execute them. (Your hands will still have blood on them though.) It's still vengence. (Seems to me, vengence is God's turf, not ours).
Since we don't follow God in everything with regards to goverment, why do people want to follow this one thing so bad. It doesn't seem like turning the other cheek to me.
Many here seem to not care whether an innocent is executed. If the state executes an innocent person then they have done several things wrong,
1 they murdered an innocent person.
2 they allowed a murderer to roam free and unpunished.
3 they have covered up there own incompetence at best or at worst they covered up there own complicity in the murder of the defendant.
Too many times the innocent have been executed, if your goverment has done this, is the blood on your hands too?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/19/2008 2:42:38 PM
|
|
|
WesP
Posts: 2359
Joined: 11/28/2005
From: Where God needs me to be
Status: offline
|
upNORTder
quote:
If you execute soimeone, there chance is over. I would much rather that person be locked up for life. That way they have that chance to find God and forgivness.
After a couple of decades on death row, do you think they may have had time to feel some remorse?
quote:
The main object of the death penalty should be to make sure that the murderer cannot murder again, a life sentence serves that purpose.
If you are looking for vengence where you don't have to get your hands dirty, than execute them. (Your hands will still have blood on them though.) It's still vengence. (Seems to me, vengence is God's turf, not ours).
It is not about vengeance. It serves as a deterrent (if it was used more often and without a 20-30 year wait) and a punishment.
Turn the other cheek is not even talking about the same thing. Take it in context. How many innocents have died? Where are the stats? How many innocents have died at the hands of others who received about 7-10 years in prison? Hmmmm? Where is fair found? That is an ideal, not a reality. The innocent are persecuted much worse in other things. Look at the crimes that execution may be used to punish. How many victims were innocents? Explain where fairness and justice is obvious.
ETA:
quote:
Too many times the innocent have been executed, if your goverment has done this, is the blood on your hands too?
Is the blood of the victims of repeat offenders that were early-release on your hands?
< Message edited by WesP -- 6/19/2008 2:48:41 PM >
_____________________________
Peace,
Wes
___________________________________
<--- BTW, this is the true function of corn! It is to help the oil industry and its functionaries, not detract from them! 
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/19/2008 3:19:17 PM
|
|
|
JimboFletch
Posts: 6364
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: upNORTder
Too many times the innocent have been executed, if your goverment has done this, is the blood on your hands too?
As always with this accusation, no proof. Name 5 people executed and proven innocent after death in the last 30 years?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/19/2008 3:21:53 PM
|
|
|
JimboFletch
Posts: 6364
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: WesP
Is the blood of the victims of repeat offenders that were early-release on your hands?
Don't forget, as previously mentioned, the people who have been murdered IN prision by convicted murderers! Are people like upNORTder guilty of those deaths?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/19/2008 3:30:40 PM
|
|
|
SinnerSaved
Posts: 318
Joined: 10/28/2007
From: Belfast, N. Ireland
Status: offline
|
If a life sentence meant life in prison, maybe we could accept it as an alternative to the death penalty. However, the average 'life' sentence actually spent behind bars in the UK is just 13.5 years! Over the last 10 years, 30 killers in the UK have served their sentences and murdered again.
We need the death penalty.
_____________________________
"Dance like nobody's watching; love like you've never been hurt. Sing like nobody's listening; live like it's heaven on earth."
Mark Twain
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/19/2008 3:34:26 PM
|
|
|
hellohellohi
Posts: 541
Joined: 12/10/2007
From: North Carolina!
Status: offline
|
quote:
I am for the death penality, but not in its present form.
There should be a 3 or 6 month absolute limit for the death penality to be imposed after sentencing.
The lengthly waits (15 to 25 years) voids the deterrent effect of the penalty.
As it was done in the 1800's was much more effective; publically and quickly.
Thanks
RC
I think 3 to 6 months is too generous.
I think the turn-around for the death penalty shoud be about 5 minutes.
Seriously, though, anything else amounts to killing in cold blood. Why kill a man in handcuffs?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/19/2008 3:56:25 PM
|
|
|
fiat_lux
Posts: 275
Joined: 5/21/2005
From: Ottawa
Status: offline
|
quote:
As always with this accusation, no proof. Name 5 people executed and proven innocent after death in the last 30 years?
It would, given available, evidence, I think be more accurate for critics to say that the system has probably executed innocent people; however, if we broaden this to a longer historical period or look at more than just the American system, it shouldn't be that difficult to point to cases where there is largely uncontested belief that the people involved were innocent. And it would be rather presumptuous to assume that where these systems are flawed, America's is perfect.
I don't think the court system is in the habit of revisiting such cases so I'm not sure where you'd find clear evidence of exoneration in such cases, if they existed. I could state that there are quite a number of innocent people who would probably now be dead if a number of people on this forum had their way and prisoners were killed rapidly rather than after a long, drawn-out legal process. Thus at the very least the system which some people envision working smoothly would result in the deaths of innocent people. If people are correct that the current system's delays make capital punishment an ineffective or less effective punishment, but critics are equally correct in pointing out that a swifter system would have meant death for people who were exonerated only after lengthy delays, than it logically follows that capital punishment is not a very useful tool - carried out swiftly it lacks accuracy, and carried out slowly it lacks efficacy.
Moreover, while I see the point in what you're saying, surely the belief that the judicial system has made no irreversible errors in capital cases is a position which requires as much faith in the system as the belief that it has made such errors requires lack of total faith in the system. Given a fallible human system, failures resulting in false punishments are inevitable. Capital punishment is an obviously more irreversible sentence than others, which makes it particularly vulnerable to criticism on this grounds.
All that said, I know there are some cases bandied about occasionally, like Jesse Tafero, Wayne Felker and Cameron Willingham (the latter three according to my quick skim of the Wikipedia article on the subject). The UK dropped its capital punishment in part due to the reaction to the execution of a probably innocent man, Evans. It subsequently posthumously exonerated several others wrongfully executed during the same time period.
There is another point worth raising, which is that under our present system, those let free are not necessarily those who are innocent, but those who aren't considered to be proven guilty. This makes a solid statistical case all the more difficult. From what I've seen, doubts about the validity of the verdict are raised in virtually every high-profile case as the date for the killing of the prisoner approaches, and even a staunch abolitionist would have to admit that most people convicted probably really are guilty.
quote:
Are people like upNORTder guilty of those deaths?
I'm fairly certain the people who are guilty of those deaths are the people who committed them. In any event, there is an obvious alternative solution: better security in prisons.
quote:
Is the blood of the victims of repeat offenders that were early-release on your hands?
Seems to me there's also a fairly obvious alternative solution in this case as well.
quote:
We need the death penalty.
Sounds like what you need is an actual life sentence, not a bogus one.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/19/2008 4:03:49 PM
|
|
|
hellohellohi
Posts: 541
Joined: 12/10/2007
From: North Carolina!
Status: offline
|
quote:
What would you suggest? A Dodge City showdown?
maybe.
When you think about establishing a sure date and moment for someone's death, you run up against something that feels absurd. For instance, did you know that Timothy McVeigh's last meal was two pints of Ben & Jerry's mint cookie? I don't know what that is supposed to mean but I just thought I'd mention it.
Anyway, yeah, I like the idea of a showdown. Stone them, I don't care.
Perhaps the IDEA of killing the captured killer is appealing to me, but when I consider actually doing it -- the moment --... The man would be in handcuffs, right? It would feel absurd.
It has been said that the only argument for the death penalty is a weak imagination. I don't know if it was me that said that just NOW though, or if I have actually read that. But it makes sense.
I would rather just not give Timothy McVeigh the mint cookie and let him sit around till he grew old -- I dunno. For some reason, that is hard to comment on -- perhaps cuz the mutha is dead. I liked it when Sadaam was found in his spider hole, but I was pretty indifferent when I watched the video of his execution. I liked it when they tried to drop a bomb on him and Uday and Qusay on April or March whatever it was 2002, but I wasn't very happy to learn he had a date set for his death -- what's the point? That is a rhetorical question since I know there is a point in some sense.
However, I can say that I am glad that Ted Kaczynski is still around. One can pray for him!!! I'm not sure if one can pray for the dead. I wouldn't cross the street to dump a pint of melted mint cookie of Tim McVeigh's grave, that's for sure.
< Message edited by hellohellohi -- 6/19/2008 4:15:03 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/19/2008 4:12:15 PM
|
|
|
hellohellohi
Posts: 541
Joined: 12/10/2007
From: North Carolina!
Status: offline
|
SinnerSAved: I found this an increidibly powerful juxtaposition:
quote:
We need the death penalty.
_____________________________
"No man is an island, entire of itself...any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee."
John Donne
Amazing.
< Message edited by hellohellohi -- 6/19/2008 4:32:35 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/19/2008 4:21:21 PM
|
|
|
JimboFletch
Posts: 6364
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: fiat_lux
quote:
Are people like upNORTder guilty of those deaths?
I'm fairly certain the people who are guilty of those deaths are the people who committed them. In any event, there is an obvious alternative solution: better security in prisons.
That was in respose to upNORTder's opinion that the blood of any innocents executed are on the hands of those that support the death penalty. My point was that, using his logic, even his position isn't without guilt because there are plenty of documented cases of murderers in prison murdering other prisoners and, sometimes, guards.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/19/2008 4:27:36 PM
|
|
|
WesP
Posts: 2359
Joined: 11/28/2005
From: Where God needs me to be
Status: offline
|
quote:
I would rather just not give Timothy McVeigh the mint cookie and let him sit around till he grew old -- I dunno. For some reason, that is hard to comment on -- perhaps cuz the mutha is dead. I liked it when Sadaam was found in his spider hole, but I was pretty indifferent when I watched the video of his execution. I liked it when they tried to drop a bomb on him and Uday and Qusay on April or March whatever it was 2002, but I wasn't very happy to learn he had a date set for his death -- what's the point? That is a rhetorical question since I know there is a point in some sense.
However, I can say that I am glad that Ted Kaczynski is still around. One can pray for him!!! I'm not sure if one can pray for the dead. I wouldn't cross the street to dump a pint of melted mint cookie of Tim McVeigh's grave, that's for sure.
Sadly, a sentence of life in prison equates to a life with 3 meals a day, free medical care, TV, exercise and weight rooms, education, etc. There is no punishment because that would be "mean." A life sentence means nothing; especially since many of them are released early. Parole should be a rare gift in special circumstances, but it is a trite way of reducing the inmate population.
I believe the death penalty should stand for a few crimes. I believe it should be the only sentence given for certain crimes, and I think it should be carried out quickly. If a person seeks God, he/she will find Him. Of that, I am certain sure. I know that it does not take years to find God, so the argument for future salvation falls on deaf ears for me. If they are repentant of what they have done, then forgiveness is theirs through Christ. Forgiveness does not remove the punishment in this world. That is for later.
_____________________________
Peace,
Wes
___________________________________
<--- BTW, this is the true function of corn! It is to help the oil industry and its functionaries, not detract from them!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/19/2008 4:36:49 PM
|
|
|
SinnerSaved
Posts: 318
Joined: 10/28/2007
From: Belfast, N. Ireland
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: hellohellohi
SinnerSAved: I found this an increidibly powerful juxtaposition:
Amazing.
And I found this an incredibly powerful juxtaposition:
Murders to Executions
672,185 to 1,099
Your point is?
_____________________________
"Dance like nobody's watching; love like you've never been hurt. Sing like nobody's listening; live like it's heaven on earth."
Mark Twain
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/19/2008 4:41:25 PM
|
|
|
hellohellohi
Posts: 541
Joined: 12/10/2007
From: North Carolina!
Status: offline
|
quote:
Sadly, a sentence of life in prison equates to a life with 3 meals a day, free medical care, TV, exercise and weight rooms, education, etc. There is no punishment because that would be "mean." Yes, but that doesn't bother me as much as the mint cookie thing for some reason.
quote:
A life sentence means nothing; especially since many of them are released early. Parole should be a rare gift in special circumstances, but it is a trite way of reducing the inmate population.
I believe the death penalty should stand for a few crimes. I believe it should be the only sentence given for certain crimes, and I think it should be carried out quickly. Perhaps you are right. Like I said, I don't think I have any arguments. quote:
If a person seeks God, he/she will find Him. Of that, I am certain sure. I know that it does not take years to find God, so the argument for future salvation falls on deaf ears for me. If they are repentant of what they have done, then forgiveness is theirs through Christ. Forgiveness does not remove the punishment in this world. That is for later.
Yes, I agree, salvation can happen in instant, so that is a good point about keeping them around being superfluous.
I am basically saying, I feel no remorse for the dead Sadaam Hussein today, even if, indeed, his blood is partially on my hands as a member of America. However, I didn't feel right at the time that we had an opportunity to keep him around and we didn't. I think it would be neat to see him sit around getting old watching cable TV. Not that that's what his fate would have been in Iraq, but... If I am inclined to kill a man, I would rather just pass him off to someone else -- heck, let him go home. I don't care. It's true he could come back kill me or my family and so on, but I'd rather him be alive. It's weird.
At the same time, I can feel a sense of righteous anger when these fools kill people for no reason, like to | | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
