Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

aRs3N1c42 · 10-15-2004, 10:09 AM

I'm gonna have to agree with SecretMethod on the interpretation of the commandment. As a Christian, if two portions of scripture seem to contradict each other it is most likely that my understanding of one or both of them is erroneous. In one "breath" God states that murder is against His will. Later, he states that the penalty for breaking most of the commandments is death. Who fulfills the sentence? The same people who are supposed to be obeying the command not to murder. Now either God is crazy (that would be blasphemous, wouldn't it?) or our understanding of God's definition of murder is wrong. God commanded Isreal to commit what comes down to genocide when they were cleaning out the rabble in the promised land. God commanded that adultery and other transgressions are punishable by death. Since it would be blasphemous to say that God is contradicting himself, we must assume that war and capital punishment are not necessarily covered under the command not to murder.

Now I also agree that Jesus commanded us that grace is better than judgement (am I repeating myself here?).

Who makes the decision when a criminal is reformed? That's what parole boards and hearings are for. I feel that there are instances where a crime is so bad that the sentance should not include an option for parole. I feel that the penal system is too cushy. Not that a maximum security prison is realy comparable to club med, but they should be as close to the line to being inhuman as is possible without crossing it. A punishment should be a punishment, not a vacation. Lose the cable TV, lose the weight room and the exercise equipment. I think hard manual labor isn't a bad idea. It keeps boredom away, provides some benefit to society and doesn't provide the comforts that club fed do now. I think it's possible to protect our citizens without removing the possibility of reform fom the equation. The fact that most criminals get three hot meals, a warm dry place to sleep and protection from harm doesn't seem like much of a punishment, especially if they are sitting around, watching cable, working out, getting all buff and thinking about how they're gonna get back at the weasel who landed them in the pen anyway. Lets get them talking about their crime, convince them why it was wrong (beyond the fact that they got caught and locked up). It seems obvious that the penalty for many crimes is not adequate in and of itself to deter people from committing them especially if they have a twisted or absent sense of morality to begin with. The penal system should be trying to instill this sense of morality where it is lacking and correcting it where it is twisted. For that matter, if our public schools were doing some of that, would there be as many criminals as there are now?

I guess that's a bit of a hot question, so I'll let someone else talk.

How I do go on.... blah, blah, blah...

10-15-2004, 10:09 AM	#49 (permalink)
aRs3N1c42 Upright Location: Somewhere over the rainbow	I'm gonna have to agree with SecretMethod on the interpretation of the commandment. As a Christian, if two portions of scripture seem to contradict each other it is most likely that my understanding of one or both of them is erroneous. In one "breath" God states that murder is against His will. Later, he states that the penalty for breaking most of the commandments is death. Who fulfills the sentence? The same people who are supposed to be obeying the command not to murder. Now either God is crazy (that would be blasphemous, wouldn't it?) or our understanding of God's definition of murder is wrong. God commanded Isreal to commit what comes down to genocide when they were cleaning out the rabble in the promised land. God commanded that adultery and other transgressions are punishable by death. Since it would be blasphemous to say that God is contradicting himself, we must assume that war and capital punishment are not necessarily covered under the command not to murder. Now I also agree that Jesus commanded us that grace is better than judgement (am I repeating myself here?). Who makes the decision when a criminal is reformed? That's what parole boards and hearings are for. I feel that there are instances where a crime is so bad that the sentance should not include an option for parole. I feel that the penal system is too cushy. Not that a maximum security prison is realy comparable to club med, but they should be as close to the line to being inhuman as is possible without crossing it. A punishment should be a punishment, not a vacation. Lose the cable TV, lose the weight room and the exercise equipment. I think hard manual labor isn't a bad idea. It keeps boredom away, provides some benefit to society and doesn't provide the comforts that club fed do now. I think it's possible to protect our citizens without removing the possibility of reform fom the equation. The fact that most criminals get three hot meals, a warm dry place to sleep and protection from harm doesn't seem like much of a punishment, especially if they are sitting around, watching cable, working out, getting all buff and thinking about how they're gonna get back at the weasel who landed them in the pen anyway. Lets get them talking about their crime, convince them why it was wrong (beyond the fact that they got caught and locked up). It seems obvious that the penalty for many crimes is not adequate in and of itself to deter people from committing them especially if they have a twisted or absent sense of morality to begin with. The penal system should be trying to instill this sense of morality where it is lacking and correcting it where it is twisted. For that matter, if our public schools were doing some of that, would there be as many criminals as there are now? I guess that's a bit of a hot question, so I'll let someone else talk. How I do go on.... blah, blah, blah...