The Death Penalty

[Ruso]

I think that this topic is very complex. I surely would like to see certain people death, and I would be lying if I said that I did not think that certain people are no good to society and ought to pay for their crimes with the strongest punishment. However, I am aware that am no one to decide who should live or not, and neither are any other humans. It is a tough question.....

[ironchapman]

I am not opposed to the idea of an electric couch.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

LOL...My grandfather had an electric chair, it was called a La-z-Boy.

Anyways, I pretty much agree with Ruso here. Some criminals who are no good to our society must be punished in such away. I also agree that it is a difficult choice to pick who should get said punishment.

[cityboi]

I am against the death penalty. The bottom of line is that it is murder and its still wrong. There is no justification for taking anyone's life lawfully or unlawfully. The focus should be on programs that help people from going down the road that leads to murder.

[Snowguy716]

That's one of the biggest problems that i have with capital punishment:

"It's wrong to murder someone, so we're going to murder you."

And it's even worse to do it because it's "too expensive" to keep them in prison. You don't have to have compassion for the person or the action.. but you should have compassion for life. (Of course it is often more complicated than this.)

As far as being useless money wasters, I think we should put them work! There's nothing like a 12 hour grueling work day, 6 days a week, for little pay for the rest of your life to teach someone a lesson.

I always thought it would be nice for the prisoners at Martha Stewart's prison to knit clothes for poor children.

Also, while PS2s and other comforts might be going too far, I think being in prison is a pretty good punishment in itself. Don't you remember, as a child, being sent to your room?

I had plenty of stuff in my room to keep me entertained (TV, SuperNintendo, music, books, etc.).. but that wasn't the point. It was hte fact that I was stuck in my room.. imprisoned until my parents thought fit. That was the real punishment. Sure, I could have fun playing video games for hours.. but when it was all said and done, I was confined.. my freedom to make a choice of leaving my room was taken away.. and to me, that was the worst punishment of all.

It sure taught me more of a lesson than getting spanked. But that's a whole other jumbo sized can of worms.

[RiversideGator]

I am against the death penalty. The bottom of line is that it is murder and its still wrong.

Actually murder is the unlawful killing of another. Capital punishments is, by definition, done through the legal system in accordance with law and is therefore lawful.

[Ruso]

Actually murder is the unlawful killing of another.

[cityboi]

instead of capital punishment, dangerous criminals should be locked away for life. To ease the prison space situation, crimanls that are not as dangerous should be put to work like you said. They gain a valuable work ethic so when they get out they will go to work and make something better of themselves instead of going back to crime. Being locked up for 10 years can make prisoners go crazy. All the noise not to mention being prey for assault and prison rape where you could get all kind of diseases like hiv. That doesnt sound like reform to me. Prsioners learn nothing after they get out of prison.

[Snowguy716]

Yes, claiming that capital punishment is murder and is therefore wrong because murder is unlawful is circular reasoning.

But I believe people need to have more respect for life, no matter what form it comes in. I think Garrison Keillor puts it right (he's a famous MInnesotan) when he says "You are not so different than anyone else so you shouldn't give yourself airs."

People who murder others have zero respect for life, but that doesn't mean we should adopt the same mindset as the killer and put the killer to death.

"Do unto others as you'd have them do unto you" does not mean "Do unto others and they'll do it back".. it's a figure of speech.

[rusthebuss]

I'm for it! So you just house someone that just murdered someone for the rest of their life. Waste of money. They should be put to death because they have no respect for no one elses life! It makes no sense to keep them alive sucking up our tax money.

[peaceloveunderstanding]

... it costs more money to put them to death then to keep them in prison. That has been mentioned before in this very thread.

On a seperate tangent, why do many of those who believe in 'right to life', believe that the government (the people) should have the right to put some one to death?

[rusthebuss]

... it costs more money to put them to death then to keep them in prison. That  has been mentioned before in this very thread.

On a seperate tangent, why do many of those who believe in 'right to life', believe that the government (the people) should have the right to put some one to death?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Why did they feel they had the right to kill someone else? So now the criminals have more rights than tax paying citizens. They murder but they need to stay alive, I don't think so. Why do they deserve to live after they took someone elses life????????????? When you take the death penalty away watch for a rise in murder rates.

[rusthebuss]

How in the world does it cost less to house and feed and clothe someone for 20-30 years than stick a needle in them or use some rope? Why should someone be able to assault someone and then that person that was assulted have to pay for them to be housed??

[peaceloveunderstanding]

legal fees and it costs money to do things somewhat properly, and even then people still slip through the cracks.

why do many of those who believe in 'right to life', believe that the government (the people) should have the right to put some one to death? Sounds like hypocrisy to me. Most mainstream churches even say that the death penalty is wrong...

[rusthebuss]

legal fees and it costs money to do things somewhat properly, and even then people still slip through the cracks.

why do many of those who believe in 'right to life', believe that the government (the people) should have the right to put some one to death? Sounds like hypocrisy to me. Most mainstream churches even say that the death penalty is wrong...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What main stream churches?????

[Viper]

No one, outside family, rants and raves for the victim of murder yet many rant and rave for the life of those on death row. Why is that?

Too many want the right to kill their unborn babies but want to get rid of capital punishment. Why is that?

I grew up in a home that was poor. At times, we went months with no electricity. Food was little, entertainment was our minds, luxuries were not our right, education was limited to public schooling, health care sucked. Criminals that could kills thousands would be granted more food, more shelter, more education, more entertainment, more health care, more luxuries....more rights. Why is that?

I have no remorse for those that take the life of others for their own greed, lust, wrath, etc.... Those that would not hesitate to put you in that chair and flip the switch themselves. These people do not deserve more.

I agree that putting them to work for life is as good an alternative but rights activists and groups would go out of their minds and they seem to have some very solid pull in Washington.

Who are we to determine who lives and who dies? We are the families, the brothers, sisters mother and fathers of those slain/raped/eaten without good cause. We are those that had life taken away from us by one who has no value in life theirself. We as the champions of the health and prosperity of our own species are given the responsibility to see to that.

It punishes, it protects, it retaliates, it deters. Peace and closure, retribution and consolation, safe guarding and containing....if we do not adhere to these elemnets, chaos reigns. Capital punishment ensures this process.

[rusthebuss]

No one, outside family, rants and raves for the victim of murder yet many rant and rave for the life of those on death row.  Why is that? 

Too many want the right to kill their unborn babies but want to get rid of capital punishment.  Why is that?

I grew up in a home that was poor.  At times, we went months with no electricity.  Food was little, entertainment was our minds, luxuries were not our right, education was limited to public schooling, health care sucked.  Criminals that could kills thousands would be granted more food, more shelter, more education, more entertainment, more health care, more luxuries....more rights.  Why is that?

I have no remorse for those that take the life of others for their own greed, lust, wrath, etc....  Those that would not hesitate to put you in that chair and flip the switch themselves.  These people do not deserve more.

I agree that putting them to work for life is as good an alternative but rights activists and groups would go out of their minds and they seem to have some very solid pull in Washington.

Who are we to determine who lives and who dies?  We are the families, the brothers, sisters mother and fathers of those slain/raped/eaten without good cause.  We are those that had life taken away from us by one who has no value in life theirself.  We as the champions of the health and prosperity of our own species are given the responsibility to see to that. 

It punishes, it protects, it retaliates, it deters.  Peace and closure, retribution and consolation, safe guarding and containing....if we do not adhere to these elemnets, chaos reigns.  Capital punishment ensures this process.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Very well said!

[rusthebuss]

Just like the guy that just killed those people in Iowa. If the judge did his job this wouldn't have happened. Its not fair for this family to pay for this idiot to sit in jail the rest of his life. Get an education behind bars and enjoy his life.

[peaceloveunderstanding]

What main stream churches?????

The largest church in the world... the Roman Catholic Church and other non church on the hill Christian churches. Do you really think Jesus would have approved of capital punishment? Turn the other cheek? Most likely he would not have. Many Christian supporters of the death penalty seem to get their belief in the righteousness of the death penalty from the old testament, putting that above the new testament. Something that truly shows volumes about the seriousness of their thought processes.

From Wikipedia.org

Often overlooked is the fact that virtually all of the mainline Christian churches in the United states have maintained official positions against the death penalty since the 1950s and early 60s.

[Ruso]

The largest church in the world... the Roman Catholic Church and other non church on the hill Christian churches. Do you really think Jesus would have approved of capital punishment? Turn the other cheek? Most likely he would not have. Many Christian supporters of the death penalty seem to get their belief in the righteousness of the death penalty from the old testament, putting that above the new testament. Something that truly shows volumes about the seriousness of their thought processes.

From Wikipedia.org

Often overlooked is the fact that virtually all of the mainline Christian churches in the United states have maintained official positions against the death penalty since the 1950s and early 60s.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well said. But you know, most forget Christ's real ideals. He who is free of sin, throw the first rock.

And also, those contradictions about being for abortion and against Criminal punishment, are common in every ideology. (Being against abortion, and not caring about iraqi kids dying, supporting less gov control, but being agsint guns, etc)

[RiversideGator]

why do many of those who believe in 'right to life', believe that the government (the people) should have the right to put some one to death? Sounds like hypocrisy to me. Most mainstream churches even say that the death penalty is wrong...

Ah, but it is in fact the reverse which is the ultimate hypocrisy: liberals believe the most innocent among us (the unborn) should be put to death on the whim of the mother while the most guilty (murderers) should not be put to death. Talk about misplaced priorities.

Well said. But you know, most forget Christ's real ideals. He who is free of sin, throw the first rock.

He also said "render unto Caeser what is Caeser's".

Just like the guy that just killed those people in Iowa. If the judge did his job this wouldn't have happened. Its not fair for this family to pay for this idiot to sit in jail the rest of his life. Get an education behind bars and enjoy his life.

BTK did not get the death penalty (which he richly deserves) because Kansas did not have the death penalty on the books when the crimes were commited. Hopefully some of his fellow inmates will give him the justice he deserves.

The bottom line on the death penalty is that society tells the potential criminal that we value the lives of our citizens so much that if you kill one of them with pre-meditation, you will lose your own life. This is a completely rational policy.

[Ruso]

Ah, but it is in fact the reverse which is the ultimate hypocrisy:  liberals believe the most innocent among us (the unborn) should be put to death on the whim of the mother while the most guilty (murderers) should not be put to death.  Talk about misplaced priorities.

He also said "render unto Caeser what is Caeser's".

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

About the abortion thing, as I said before, that is common in liberals and conservatives, muslims, christians, jews, buddhists, etc.

And, seemingly, I will always find quotes from Christ that will fit my beliefs, and you will find them too. Religion's relativity.

[RiversideGator]

Religion's relativity.

Most religion is not relative. People are. I think the Bible, for example, is quite clear on most subjects. People intentionally or negligently misconstrue or misrepresent what the Bible says however for their own purposes.

[Snowguy716]

I find it no less hypocritical that conservatives want to ban abortion but want to see more criminals put to death.

Consistency people! Of course the abortion issue is much more complicated. But generally, I disagree with it and it should be restricted... and should the death penalty.

As far as the Bible being consistent: Hardly. There are contradictions EVERYWHERE in the Bible. For example, the Bible tells slaves that they should be content with their masters.

It is clear that the Bible was not written for a 21st century audience. And the fact that it has been re-translated so many times since it was written can tell you a lot.

I think with the slave issue here would be read two ways:

The more traditional Christians (Lutherans, Catholics, Anglican, etc.) would say: The Bible was speaking to a culture that believed slavery was okay. But don't think it's okay, so we can read that line in a more broad sense: Be content with your superiors... but they should treat you well, also.

The fundamentalists would say: They weren't really referring to slavery. They'd tie it somehow to something completely different and explain it away while trying to maintain the infallability of the Bible. It is much like the local Baptist church here tries to explain to people that drinking alcohol is a sin and that when they say wine in the bible, they meant grape juice.

But I digress.

[Viper]

I find it no less hypocritical that conservatives want to ban abortion but want to see more criminals put to death.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's not hypocritical. Those on Death Row are guilty, babies are innocent. Please explain the hypocrisy there.

The hypocrisy is the other way around: liberals want to remove death row yet kill babies. Kill the innocent and allow the guilty to live.....brilliant.

[RiversideGator]

Of course the abortion issue is much more complicated.

The abortion issue is not complicated at all - it is wrong except in extreme cases. The only people trying to complicate the issue are moral relativists who dont understand right from wrong.

It is clear that the Bible was not written for a 21st century audience. And the fact that it has been re-translated so many times since it was written can tell you a lot.

The Bible is a timeless document. The only portions which seem to be time specific are those portions of the Old Testament which relate to food and hygene. This was all superceded by the New Testament however and have no force or effect in Christianity. As far as the translation goes, this is also false. These are many good new translations, from the original text, in use in Christian churches around the world. This is not a text which cannot be understood due to multiple errors in translation.

As far as the Bible being consistent: Hardly. There are contradictions EVERYWHERE in the Bible. For example, the Bible tells slaves that they should be content with their masters.

What is contradictory about this statement? This is consistent with the statement of Jesus to "render unto Caeser what is Caeser's" in that it urges people to submit to earthly government and authority but prepare themselves for the afterlife. Inconsistent means that the text urges people in different passages to do things which are in contradiction with each other. This is not an example if inconsistency.

It is much like the local Baptist church here tries to explain to people that drinking alcohol is a sin and that when they say wine in the bible, they meant grape juice.

The anti-alcohol stance of many Christians comes from the Biblical injunction to treat your body as a temple and also from the fact that, when under the influence, one's inhibitions are lowered and it is easier to sin.