Like many others I am for it in theory. However, there are too many what-ifs involved right now. If there were a 100% guarantee that someone committed a crime (i.e. video footage or a confession) I'd have no problem with it because I'd know for certain. It's the old dictum "It's better to let 10 guilty men go free than to let one innocent suffer."
Against. Theoretically and practically. What's your opinion on torture??? Some of those MF's sure deserve all the pain and suffering we could muster. But it's still wrong. As is the death penalty. In the words of Charles Barkley....it's uncivilized!
IMHO- deserve is an important word to use... deserve means necessary and just. if you deserve something you shouldn't get something else- Justice runs along this line- an eye for an eye. Someone murders your child, they must forfeit their life as a 'just' punishment. That is strictly on the basis of justice and the legal definition of justice. Now the question would be what is the just punishment for torture? BTW- if you have laws without punishment you have no law only advice. If there is no penalty for breaking a law it is not a law. So without punishment there are no laws. Now with punishment the issues are- 1. Is it just (an act of justice- ie. does the punishment fit the crime) 2. Is it man's idea or God's idea of justice 3. Is it carried out by men rightly or justly or is it corrupted justice. Corrupt justice makes capital punishment a dangerous thing indeed.
did christ say this? or was it something that someone said to someone who then told it to someone else who put it in the bible? [edit] And if you take this to it's logical conclusion then we would have to steal from thieves and rape rapists. So whatever the justifications for capital punishment, it's unwise to quote them from the Bible, which can be a real Pandora's box. Besides, Jesus will have a few things to say about "eye for eye, tooth for tooth."
An eye for an eye will leave the whole world blind -- Gandhi. Should we cut off the hands of thieves? What if we tell them ahead of time...then they know they're making that 'choice' by stealing. If we don't cut off their hands, have we foregone punishment? Taking the life of the murderer does not replace the life of the child. Neither does it avenge the crime. Should we return to public hangings? Why not? Why sanitize the act if you're going to continue to champion it?
It comes from Exodus 21:12-25 (various laws against violence) Christ quoted v. 25 in Matthew 5:38- Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you that you resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
So rhester, as a follower of Jesus, are you for "an-eye-for-an-eye" or not? Your opinion in post #23 seems to suggest you are not against it. Can you clarify yourself once for all, on your stance on death penalty? I do not mean to force you to give a yes or no, if you say undecided I fully understand, since I myself are struggling with it.
You are mixing three separate ideas, justice, restitution and mercy. Justice is right and should (and will be ultimately) be decided by God- if men carry out justice it should be in line with God's justice which is right, impartial and equitable. Justice deals with law and punishment deals with the righteousness and value of a law. With this in mind cutting off the hand of a thief is wrong because it is unjust. The just punishment for a thief would be to pay back what is stolen (there is clear direction on this in the Bible I just don't remember it all off my head) Also hangings weren't given in the Bible as just punishments. There are some severe punishments given though and they should only be carried out when it is absolutely just to do so. Justice does not need to be sanatized if it is truly just (absolutely correct and deserving) and if it not corrupted by men. Restitution- Restitution replaces what is lost. And in cases of murder only God can do that. Man has no ability to replace a life. Mercy- Mercy is what Jesus spoke of. It is the circumstance where justice can be both satisfied and set aside. No one guilty deserves mercy. No one innocent deserves punishment. Ghandi- if you extrapolate what Ghandi was saying you can understand why Jesus died on the cross. If everyone receives justice for every wrong committed then everyone would be punished accordingly. This is what God means when He says we will be judged in righteousness. The standard of justice will be holiness- absolute obedience to law- perfection. So to extrapolate what Ghandi said if everyone is judged by God for their sins everyone will be judged to Hell.- The whole world will be blinded by sin and the result will be judgment. So on a temporary scale on earth Ghandi referred to the need of man's mercy and forgiveness, but on an eternal scale with God man is in need of God's mercy and forgiveness. Jesus provides access to God's mercy and forgiveness and thus fulfills the ultimate reality of Ghandi's quote. If you believe Ghandi for time on earth, it would be wise to believe God for eternity.
Against. There are some people who I'd make an exception for, but implementing a policy of only killing the really bad, bad, bad people is untenable.
Perhaps the final justice will be determined by God. But in the meantime...we have to decide how we apply it here. IMO the death penalty is barbaric. Whether we stone someone to death in a public square, fry 'em up on a chair behind closed doors, or have a doctor in a starched white uniform inject poison under the most hygenic conditions. Should we condemn other 'backwards' societies for their cruel punishments, when we continue to support the harshest penalty of all. Compare countries with and without the death penalty, and decide which group you prefer. You'll note the ol' US of A seems out of place with Death Penalty crowd.
i have 2 problems with it: 1. i feel like it's giving up on life and possibilities for redemption here (not necessarily redemption after death); 2. i know the jury system all too well...and while i think it's as good as we have at getting to truth...it's certainly not perfect. nowhere near perfect. it's of man. and that means innocent folks get killed by the state...the state which is "by the people and of the people" which, technically, means me. no, thanks.
I feel similar but I must note my perspect is different- Murder is barbaric. The punishment will justly be severe. I think that there is a difference between barbaric or cruel- and severe. For instance, gravity is a law that has severe consequences for the degree it is violated. Is it barbaric for gravity to smash someone into mush who jumps off a 50 story building onto concrete? Is it severe to punish a crooked politician with jail time? not in my opinion. Cruel punishment to me would be punishment that does not fit the crime. For instance if someone criticized the government and was arrested for that dissent and then imprisoned and tortured, I would call that cruel and unusual punishment. I don't like capital punishment much especially with the abuse and corruption associated with it. But I understand its merit with regard to severe punishment for the most horrible crimes.
I feel the same way- I certainly would want that opportunity for redemption and mercy if it was for me and I think the same way about others. My own thoughts on justice and punishment go more basic and Bible (as in Old Testament dealings of God). I take in account that God is perfect in justice and knows better than us what He is doing. I also take in account the Biblical use of justice with regard to God's judgments. I do not think if God were to judge someone it would be a cruel or unusual punishment. (I know some people see God as harsh and cruel, especially in the Old Testament)
I'm all for it...but in some cases, it may be a better punishment to incarcerate for life. That being said...I think one of the most heinous crimes (if not the most) is child molestation. In these cases, I have to think that the hell that the inmates live thru who are convicted child molesters is far worse than being put to sleep, however, the molesters rarely get life and they get out and do it again. These people, it seems, are rarely rehabilitated properly.
I’m not sure I’m understanding your position here rhester. As far as Christians go I think John 8 is close to the definitive statement on the death penalty. "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone…” WWJD? This is what Jesus did. But of course men can’t carry out justice, no more than they can live a just (sinless) life themselves. In fact it is the very purpose of the law to show us this, and it is for this very reason that as Christians we must live by the new covenant. I don’t see any way to square the death penalty with Christian beliefs, and I can think of no NT passages that support it. But again, since men are inherently flawed they can never truly carry out justice. And let’s not forget what God ultimately wants from us. Hosea 6:6 6 For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings. This passage is so important that it’s referenced in the NT two more times. Let’s be very careful to be clear here. While this is true from God’s perspective it is in fact true for every human being on earth. “There is no one righteous, not even one…” (Romans 3). From our perspective we are commanded in no uncertain terms to show mercy to sinners. This is absolutely central to Christian faith, of course! 1You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. 2Now we know that God's judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. 3So when you, a mere man, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God's judgment? 4Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God's kindness leads you toward repentance? (Romans 2) I have some real problems with the rest of what you’ve said too but I trust that I’m simply misunderstanding what you’re saying, so maybe this part will clear that up.
Rhester, you are saying some very very serious things here. There is a fundamental difference between the understanding of justice in the NT and the OT as you must surely know. This is not to say that the NT negates the OT. On the contrary, it completes it. But if you are a Christian you must live by the New Covenant and the understanding of justice that is contained in it. This is as fundamental as it gets.
OK. I'm sick and tired of this quote. It makes absolutely no sense. I get the purpose of it ... 2 eyes and all. But an eye for an eye simly leaves each of us with one eye, not blind. That's just always gotten on my nerves.
I’m quite sure that rherster doesn’t mean what it sounds like he’s saying because this is the absolute cornerstone of Christianity. I'm sure this is a misunderstanding of some sort. I have to leave and I likely won’t be back until later this evening but to hopefully add some clarity to this for all here’s Hebrews 8 for starters: Hebrews 8 The High Priest of a New Covenant 1The point of what we are saying is this: We do have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, 2and who serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by man. 3Every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices, and so it was necessary for this one also to have something to offer. 4If he were on earth, he would not be a priest, for there are already men who offer the gifts prescribed by the law. 5They serve at a sanctuary that is a copy and shadow of what is in heaven. This is why Moses was warned when he was about to build the tabernacle: "See to it that you make everything according to the pattern shown you on the mountain."[a] 6But the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, and it is founded on better promises. 7For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. 8But God found fault with the people and said: "The time is coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. 9It will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they did not remain faithful to my covenant, and I turned away from them, declares the Lord. 10This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time, declares the Lord. I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. 11No longer will a man teach his neighbor, or a man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest. 12For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more."[c] 13By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=65&chapter=8&version=31 This is no less than the very cornerstone of Christianity. It’s the very reason Christ came.
