aRs3N1c42

My personal stance on the death penalty is that, it may be less expensive to execute a criminal instead of giving them 20+ years of public welfare in a penetentiary (3 meals a day, a warm dry bed, safety from death or bodily injury (relatively speaking, a new girlfriend named "Bubba" doesn't count), however as an optimist or humanist (whatever you want to call it) I believe that somewhere deep inside, people want to do what is right. Killing them doesn't give them the chance to change. Whatever the Old Testament says, Jesus taught that "he who is without sin..." and "love your enemies" and the rest that would indicate to me that capital punishment was a concession for the Hebrew people for that time in their history. Since Jesus came to fulfill the law, his teachings should hold more weight than what came before. I'm not going to go into the apparent inconsistencies here between Old Testament Law and New Testament teachings. Jesus taught that grace and mercy are better than judgement and vengence. Killing a convict, no matter how heinous the crime leaves little room for grace and mercy and no chance for that life to be redeemed. I'd rather leave that decision to God. I certainly don't want the responsibility for that choice. I think perhaps that more people would be against capital punishment if the alternative were more effective. There is not enough effort put into rehabilitating prison inmates. I like the line from Shawshank Redemption where he states that he wasn't a criminal until he spent time in prison. I think our prison system has failed us in that instead of turning criminals into productive citizens, it just removes the criminal from society for a time only to release a criminal back into society at a later date. In my time here on earth learning about God and humanity, I think that Jesus would be for rehabilitation and against capital punishment.

asaris

Well, it's difficult to build social theory directly on scripture, since scripture is directed primarily at individuals rather than states. Jesus taught that we should forgive our enemies, but that clearly doesn't entail the same thing for the state as it does for us. The state has the responsibility to protect its citizens, and this sometimes involves going after and killing its enemies rather than forgiving them. I doubt anyone thinks that the judicial system would be better off if judges simply forgave criminals.

The difficulty with rehabilitation is that, if it is our only theory of punishment, we end up treating criminals as if they were sick, rather than as if they were criminals. This would imply that we treat the criminal until they are 'better'. And who decides when the criminal is 'better'? Naturally I don't mean to suggest that rehabilitation shouldn't be a goal of the justice system, only that it shouldn't be the only or even the most important goal.

__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."

"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."

-- Friedrich Nietzsche

tiberry

Isn't the real question here related to the "deterrent" that the death penalty is often purported to have? I don't want to argue the point of whether or not that works or not. But just to clarify - two broad thoughts are:

1. Humans act as a judge in enforcing "God's laws". You killed, so we kill you. Taking the religious slant, its not our place to judge, which would be a world with no immediate consequences for killing indiscrimenently; we'll just let God deal with you later.


2. Since we need immediate consequences (whether its a deterrent or prevention) we justify our killing. Doesn't this imply a lack of faith? After all, if we REALLY have faith in God, wouldn't we leave the judgement up to him?

Honestly - I don't care either way. Some may conclude that this makes me a faithless pagan or someone without morals, but truthfully - my "religious" beliefs are that humans will always be human...further than that is too far off topic to even start here.

__________________
My life's work is to bridge the gap between that which is perceived by the mind and that which is quantifiable by words and numbers.

thefictionweliv

The death penalty in biblical theology should have ended in the Old Testament where bassically you were put to death for nearly everything. Jesus brought mercy into the timeline and to the guidelines of his followers. Therefore in the preachings of the New Testament that Christians now adhere to the death penalty would be wrong.

JustDisGuy

Well, here's my two bits.

I am Christian, and am not in favour of the death penalty, aka capital punishment.

The reason however is because of the possibility of an innocent life being taken in the pursuit of the guilty. The Bible specifically authorizes the Rule of Law and in many places advocates the use of the death penalty. It is not a forbidden punishment under the tenets of Christianity.

If we could be 100% certain that only the guilty would suffer the ultimate toll for their crimes, I think I would have to reconsider my position.

-pause-

The offenders who would likely be penalized in such fashion would be some of the most expensive to society in terms of 'upkeep'.

The possibility exists that their crimes are the result of some mental condition that is curable.

Someone who breaks the law may still be rehabilitated and make a meaningful contribution to society.

Nope - still against it. It's the optimist in me that suggests that we can be reasonably sure that an offender has been sufficiently rehabilitated to be released before they are. AND, that tells me that the process isn't going to be interfered with politically, but of course that is not the case in reality. Political interference - yet another excellent CON in the argument for capital punishment.

Here's are a few scenarios:
1.Put yourself on death row for a crime you didn't commit. Is the death penalty still a good idea? Would you sacrifice yourself and your family's time with you for this perceived benefit?

2.You're on death row, and you're guilty. You killed your daughter, who was severely mentally and physically handicapped, and suffered excruciating pain every day of her life. She had the cognitive ability of a six month old child, and there was no hope of any improvement, ever. You also happen to be a doctor - say, a geneticist. One who, if released, eventually has an epiphany and comes up with a cure for -insert terrible illness here-. Is society better off with you dead, or contributing to its benefit?

3.You're on death row. You're guilty. You're poor, uneducated, genetically challenged and we are all quite certain you'll never make any meaningful direct contribution to society. You cost the taxpayers $80000 per year for your incarceration. Should you be put to death?
Now, it's a year after 'the date'. You're alive, and talking with a psychologist. She realizes what caused you to do the crimes you did, and effects a cure that can prevent any future person from being subjected to that particular causal effect.
Oops, sorry - you're dead. No psychologist after all.
Is society better off?

Capital punishment is a lose - lose scenario, and the problems with it are not religious in nature. As a Christian, I am neither for nor against the death penalty. As a member of our society, I am steadfastly opposed.

__________________
"Act as if the future of the universe depends on what you do, while laughing at yourself for thinking that your actions make any difference."

cybersharp

My support of the death sentance has nothing to do with religous reasons....its simple that if someone wants to do somthing that merits a death sentence and maybe in some farfetched way affect me then they can go right on ahead and die.....because like it or not no matter what i say i know that where 1 leaders other will follow thus....why through myself infront of a horde? There simple is no reason.....anouther reason for my support of it comes from the quote. "Catch the ill'ness before it catches someone else and eliminate it."

__________________
0PtIcAl

portereight

it seems that many pro death penalty people identify themselves as christian
God gave life, and commanded that it shall not be taken. Unless there was some fine print or an asterisk next to that commandment I'd say that "no" to the death penalty should be pretty cut and dried to a christian. This commandment is presented as sufficient to ban abortion. Now of course if you were to point out that the bible says something else, now that would be contradictory and thus imperfect... slippery slope
If you say you live by the word of God, you can't treat the Bible like a pick and choose buffet.
-Just stirring up thought and debate, honestly not meant to offend anyone

SecretMethod70

portereight: I am against the death penalty, however, the english translation of the commandment you refer to is quite poor. A better translation is "thou shalt not take innocent life" i.e. "thou shalt not murder" as opposed to "thou shalt not kill."

I'm against the death penalty, and Christian, but that commandment is a weak argument against it.

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

aRs3N1c42

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...

martinguerre

" If you say you live by the word of God, you can't treat the Bible like a pick and choose buffet."

No...such disregard would be unhealthy. But so too would be to try to eliminate any critical evaluation of what passages mean. I find it very frustrating to see people argue against a fundamentalist strawman, and then claim it's the only legitimate Christianity. I should know...i used to do it myself.

The point i'd like to make is that Christianity is not unthinking acceptance...saying the Bible is scripture will not make it a self-interpreting document. Do not be careless with it, that's for sure. But do not be thoughtless, either.

Lebell

I'm sorry, but while the "Kill them All, Let God Sort 'em Out" slogan makes for a great t-shirt, as a personal philosophy I find it abhorant.

I am a Christian and opposed to the death penalty on philosophical grounds.

In essence, it is potentially not only a death sentence on their life, but a sentence to Hell as well, since they will never have a chance to redeem their lives.

I am not under the dillusion that every inmate "finds Jesus", but it does happen.

So long as they are locked away forever, this is sufficient for me.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

adysav

I'm pretty sure they won't get much of a chance to redeem themselves while behind bars. It might matter to god whether you repent or not, but it sure as hell won't matter to the victims and society, who are really only concerned with the fact that they commited a crime in the first place.

martinguerre

"it sure as hell won't matter to the victims and society, who are really only concerned"

This thread is disussing that issue...so i wouldn't treat it as a foregone conclusion.

SecretMethod70

The justice system's job isn't to exact revenge on behalf of victims and their families, it is to punish and/or rehabilitate the person who committed the crime in such a way as to protect society. Removing the person from society for life is the most that is necessary to achieve this.

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

asaris

If it was somewhat more likely that the criminal would escape, I can easily see the death penalty being justfied. Better that the criminal should die than that he should escape and kill more innocent people. But given the fact that our jails are pretty secure, I don't think it's justified.

__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."

"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."

-- Friedrich Nietzsche

adysav

What is punishment if not revenge on behalf of society as a whole?
Exactly what the death penalty does.

SecretMethod70

Punishment is a reasonable penalty imposed for wrongdoing. Revenge is an act driven by emotions and irrationality. Aside for that, I think I can state what I mean a bit better: the primary duty of prisons is to PROTECT society by removing the criminal, then to work to rehabilitate the criminal, and it's final, and least important duty, is to "punish" the criminal.

And, yes, the death penalty DOES remove the person from society for their life. But life imprisonment does so just as well now. Prison escapes are rediculously rare enough, let alone escapes by people who are spending their life in prison or are on death row.

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

martinguerre

Umm? Cleaning the dishes and shooting them with a 12 gauge. Both remove grease...

I'm sorry...but there's a call to be proportional. If the goal is to remove a threat from society, we are not called to use the most lethal means available.

Ustwo

Oddly secret I don't see Libertarians as the type to have a giant prison system.

Most to me seem to want 'justice' and justice may well be the death of the criminal.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Suave

Since most criminals sit on death row for at LEAST a decade, and on average approxmiately twenty years, along with numerous other costs of the death penalty, death row inmates are costlier than normal inmates. If it was just "guilty, out you go, now kill them", then it would be cheaper; the United States' current system is not.

The main difficulty in administering the death penalty from my point of view is that it is final. If someone is found to be innocent afterwards, you cannot release them from death. It's basically "Whoops, our bad. Sorry we killed somebody because we're a bunch of fuckups". At least with life imprisonment, those who are wrongfully convicted can have a chance of being freed in due time; similarily it can go with those who committed lesser crimes but are inaccurately convicted of more serious crimes, and those who do become repentant.

It would also be cheaper to just have prisoners live in prison towns, where they would be forced to farm and work to sustain themselves, rather than having everything handed to them on a plate. You can still run a total institution without feeding and clothing people and attending to them like children.

martinguerre

The problem with a person sucessfully appealing a conviction being? so much better to kill them first, ask questions later, no?