|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Capital Punishment debate
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
The point, Mad Geo, being that without intent they are innocent. Therefore they need protecting. People die in accidents too.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
sharkshooter
Not your average shark
# 1589
|
Posted
On th off chance that Doublethink really does want to understand, rather than just pick a fight (which I doubt based on the TITCH thread)...
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
...For those who are pro: What is the point of capital punishment ? What exactly do you hope to achieve ? In terms of the individual perpetrator, in terms the surviving victim and/or those who had ties to the victim, and in terms of society as a whole ?
The Point is to punish. What is hoped to achieve is punishment for the guilty and protection for society. Those who had ties to the victim - I assume you mean his/her family. They have to deal with the horror inflicted with the act, it is not, in my opinion, the job of the legal system to deal with that.
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
What do you do if your goals for these different people and groups conflict ? What is your priority ? To take one of the examples discussed above, would you still want this punishment if it decreases convictions ? Would you want it if it decreased the murder by 50% rate but increased the number of police officers killied in shoot-outs during arrests ?
These goals do not conflict. Priority is, therefore, irrelevant.
If the existence of this form of punishment decreases convictions, the system is in need or repair. That is, those who would find someone not guilty in spite of the evidence solely so the guilty will not be executed should be weeded out of the jury pool for capital offenses.
As to your last question. The outcome you wish to be assumed cannot be so assumed. I will not get pulled into such hypothetical arguments. I see no purpose to them.
--------------------
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [Psalm 19:14]
Posts: 7772 | From: Canada; Washington DC; Phoenix; it's complicated | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by sharkshooter:
If the existence of this form of punishment decreases convictions, the system is in need or repair. That is, those who would find someone not guilty in spite of the evidence solely so the guilty will not be executed should be weeded out of the jury pool for capital offenses.
So jurors are just a sort of machine programmed to do what the government tells them? And any with an independent conscience - or a different view of the law from - need to be removed from the process?
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Teufelchen
Shipmate
# 10158
|
Posted
Where does the state get the authority to punish people in such an absolute and final way?
T.
--------------------
Little devil
Posts: 3894 | From: London area | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by sharkshooter:
If the existence of this form of punishment decreases convictions, the system is in need or repair. That is, those who would find someone not guilty in spite of the evidence solely so the guilty will not be executed should be weeded out of the jury pool for capital offenses.
So jurors are just a sort of machine programmed to do what the government tells them? And any with an independent conscience - or a different view of the law from - need to be removed from the process?
Another issue is that in England and Wales the jury is left to its own devices. What each juror thinks, says and decides is left in the jury room and unlike those in California who blabbed after the Michael Jackson trial any juror speaking out after a trial in England and Wales could easily find themselves on a contempt charge.
I suppose this will all change soon in the name orf "Modernisation".
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
sharkshooter
Not your average shark
# 1589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Teufelchen:
Where does the state get the authority to punish people in such an absolute and final way?
T.
From the people who elected the government who passed the laws.
--------------------
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [Psalm 19:14]
Posts: 7772 | From: Canada; Washington DC; Phoenix; it's complicated | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
sharkshooter
Not your average shark
# 1589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
So jurors are just a sort of machine programmed to do what the government tells them? And any with an independent conscience - or a different view of the law from - need to be removed from the process?
Yes.
It is the role of the government, not a jury or a judge, to make law.
--------------------
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [Psalm 19:14]
Posts: 7772 | From: Canada; Washington DC; Phoenix; it's complicated | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28
|
Posted
executed man may have been innocent
just a little something to throw into the debate, from cnn today.
and of course the thought that every time an innocent person is executed for something they didn't do, it means a guilty person is running around free.
--------------------
On pilgrimage in the endless realms of Cyberia, currently traveling by ship. Now with live journal!
Posts: 11803 | From: New York City "The City Carries On" | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
John Holding
Coffee and Cognac
# 158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by sharkshooter:
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
So jurors are just a sort of machine programmed to do what the government tells them? And any with an independent conscience - or a different view of the law from - need to be removed from the process?
Yes.
It is the role of the government, not a jury or a judge, to make law.
No.
It is the role of the government to make law.
It is not the role of judges and juries to act as an extension of the government. They are specifically constituted so as to be totally independent of the government.
Their job is to decide what the facts are, and decide whether a particular person is or is not guilty of a crime and worthy of the consequent punishment. It is well attested that throughout the history of common law, juries (and judges) have exercised a right to acquit if the penalty was inappropriate (in their eyes). And in today's world, if the crown disagrees with a verdict, it has the right to appeal the result.
John
Posts: 5929 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
I agree with sharkshooter that the criminal justice system is not the right forum for assisting suvivors and the families and friends of the victims. Though I do feel the state has a role here, in so far as it has not suceeded in its aim of protecting them. Though I would want this done through statutary compensation and free healthcare support as needed. (I am aware this is done at least partially in the UK.)
I think we do need to take seriously the unintended side effects of a given punishment. Whether that is lynching if you don't have the death penalty or lowered conviction rates if you do. There is some evidence that if you sift a jury for people with pro-capital opinons you get more chance of conviction. (Studies using vignettes with two different types of jury same case outlines.) You may just exchange one kind of bias for another.
I suppose we can go on trying to provide better and better systems but none will ever be perfect. We don't currently have the death penalty in the UK but that may change. we tend to follow a US lead in some things, which makes me worry about the idea of plea bargains which is starting to be floated. If anything I think this just introduces an element of unfairness into the way sentences are applied - inluding the death penalty.
At base, I am not sure that I have a logical argument against the death penalty - it's more the idea that it is wrong to take human life, it doesn't become right because the state does it. I also feel that it corrupts those called upon to carry it out.
There is also something that is very nihilistic about the whole idea - nothing is created or resolved through it. Why not, for example, have people imprisoned for life the products of whose labour are sold or used for the benefit of society. This also allows for the possibility of / opportunity for, repentence.
[ 21. November 2005, 19:17: Message edited by: Doublethink ]
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
romanlion
editorial comment
# 10325
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by nicolemrw:
executed man may have been innocent
just a little something to throw into the debate, from cnn today.
and of course the thought that every time an innocent person is executed for something they didn't do, it means a guilty person is running around free.
Imagine that! A man shoots a police officer under circumstances too shady for the D.A. to press charges, and then gets executed for an unrelated crime that he did not commit, on the eyewitness account of a 19 year old illegal immigrant that took some persuasion to pick out the photo of the man who shot him.
Punitive or not, capital punishment makes for sweet revenge if you're a dirty cop.
It sucks to be that guy, but unfortunately the demographic at your local death row is far too brown for most people to give a shit.
--------------------
"You can't get rich in politics unless you're a crook" - Harry S. Truman
Posts: 1486 | From: White Rose City | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
sharkshooter
Not your average shark
# 1589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
...it is wrong to take human life, it doesn't become right because the state does it. I also feel that it corrupts those called upon to carry it out.
I disagree with those two statements.
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
... Why not, for example, have people imprisoned for life the products of whose labour are sold or used for the benefit of society. ....
A life sentence rarely is for life.
--------------------
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [Psalm 19:14]
Posts: 7772 | From: Canada; Washington DC; Phoenix; it's complicated | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
Thank you for your responses. I am serious about understanding the pro view. After all, as someone who is anti - I do realise I am in the minority.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Kevin
Ship's Gaffer
# 3492
|
Posted
This the 21st century. CP is obsolete. Old Testament times were twenty one centuries ago!
Punish criminals thusly in all states in the US:
Let them live in filth, eat bad meals, isolate them from the general population, deny all visitors, censor all post, bill their families for their incarceration or seize assets, bring back 'cruel and unusual punishmnent' for child rape, homicide, paedophilia - execution solves nothing. Life in prison without parole!
![[Mad]](angryfire.gif)
[ 22. November 2005, 02:40: Message edited by: Sir Kevin ]
--------------------
If you board the wrong train, it is no use running along the corridor in the other direction Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Writing is currently my hobby, not yet my profession.
Posts: 30517 | From: White Hart Lane | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by sharkshooter:
A life sentence rarely is for life.
Have you a reference for this, Sharkshooter?
It's my impression that in the US, at least, a sentence to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole is just that (barring a rare exercise of clemency or pardon.) I haven't found national statistics, but this article on the Louisiana State Penitentiary at Angola says that the half of inmates who are lifers there "will never be released from the prison." (The article is from a 1998 newsletter of the National Prison Hospice Association.) I'd be interested to learn of an authoritative source on this topic, if you know of one.
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
sharkshooter
Not your average shark
# 1589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
quote:
Originally posted by sharkshooter:
A life sentence rarely is for life.
Have you a reference for this, Sharkshooter?
...
Try this analysis by the John Howard Society: here. We have no true life imprisonment in Canada ...
quote:
There are four classifications of indeterminate sentences in Canada, three of which involve life imprisonment and a fourth which involves “indefinite detention,” which can be imposed upon being declared a Dangerous Offender. The four classifications are: life imprisonment as a minimum sentence with no eligibility for parole for 25 years, life imprisonment as a minimum sentence with no eligibility for parole for 10 to 25 years, life as a maximum sentence and indeterminate sentences imposed on Dangerous Offenders.
Note that all categories allow for parole.
--------------------
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [Psalm 19:14]
Posts: 7772 | From: Canada; Washington DC; Phoenix; it's complicated | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dobbo
Shipmate
# 5850
|
Posted
A few thoughts
Justice is blind
No it is not - as far as I am aware over 90% of those on death row are black
Justice is impartial
No - not if you have enough money to buy an extremely expensive legal team
My cousin who works as a procurator fiscal - does confuse me sometimes - she says that the jury tend to not convict if the crime is carries a capital offence (she worked in the states in a legal capacity against the death penalty) but is not averse to entertaining castration for repeat rapists.
I also find that use of the death sentence may have been more satisfactory in the case of Myra Hindley (who ended up dying in prison with pnuemonia at 60) see here In this case she was a political football - none of the Home Secretaries would release her because they would have been "soft on crime". I watched a programme on TV about her which showed both sides and one woman was totally consumed by hatred for Myra - her only reason for living was to ensure that Myra was never released - that was her life sentence as well - perhaps if the death sentence had been invoked that woman may have been able to get on with her life.
An interesting thought - the police officers that killed a Brazillian going towards a tube train - should they be up for the death penalty if it were introduced.
--------------------
I'm holding out for Grace......, because I know who I am, and I hope I don't have to depend on my own religiosity
Bono
Posts: 395 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Kevin:
Punish criminals thusly in all states in the US:
Let them live in filth, eat bad meals, isolate them from the general population, deny all visitors, censor all post, bill their families for their incarceration or seize assets, bring back 'cruel and unusual punishmnent' for child rape, homicide, paedophilia - execution solves nothing. Life in prison without parole!
I disagree with pretty much all of this, unsurprising really given what I've said above.
However, do want to tackle something about this. People seem to almost think of sexual offenses as morally worse than murder. [No I am not saying that Sir Kevin said this specifically - just triggered my thoughts in this direction.] Paedophillia is a disgusting crime, as is rape, but are these acts not of a different order to murder ?
[ 22. November 2005, 18:00: Message edited by: Doublethink ]
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
wombat
Shipmate
# 5180
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by sharkshooter:
quote:
Originally posted by josephine:
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Kevin:
Is it not generally thought that vicious murderers and other sociopaths want to be executed for their crimes? Why do the US do them that favour? Why do they execute those guilty of murder and treason but not paedophiles?
My understanding is that, for sex-related crimes in the US, when the severity of the expected punishment increases, the conviction rate decreases, so that if you had capital punishment for pedophiles, none of them would ever be convicted.
Do you think that is because jurors do not want people executed so they find them "not guilty" to avoid it in spite of the evidence?
Historically speaking, in the 18th century, Britain had the Death Penalty for dozens upon dozens of crimes. You could be executed for stealing a sufficiently well made pie. The end result was that juries frequently refused to convict and most people ended up being pardoned if they were convicted.
If the punishment seems disproportionate to juries, they will frequently acquit, since they usually have no way to lower the punishment to the level they find suitable.
--------------------
John Walter Biles
Historian in Training
Posts: 363 | From: Maryland | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
I think I agree with that last post. After all its more or less exactly what I said myself on the previous page... ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
sharkshooter
Not your average shark
# 1589
|
Posted
My point, which I am sure I have already made, is that I don't think that is the role of a jury.
Are we done yet, or does anyone have anything new to say?
--------------------
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [Psalm 19:14]
Posts: 7772 | From: Canada; Washington DC; Phoenix; it's complicated | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
John Holding
Coffee and Cognac
# 158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by sharkshooter:
My point, which I am sure I have already made, is that I don't think that is the role of a jury.
Are we done yet, or does anyone have anything new to say?
Not new -- just to repeat, that this is a role juries have historically performed over several centuries. It seems a little brusque to brush off the experience of centuries in order to achieve a (debatable) theoretical purity.
It may not be the function of a single, specific jury (except in unusual circumstances), but for the legal systems based on that of England, it certainly can be argued that it is the function of juries in general.
John
Posts: 5929 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
HenryT
Canadian Anglican
# 3722
|
Posted
The function of juries is justice, not law. In common law countries, that means that the jury is free to say "not guilty and he can keep the pig", as the old joke goes.
--------------------
"Perhaps an invincible attachment to the dearest rights of man may, in these refined, enlightened days, be deemed old-fashioned" P. Henry, 1788
Posts: 7231 | From: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28
|
Posted
have you never heard of jury nullification, sharkshooter?
--------------------
On pilgrimage in the endless realms of Cyberia, currently traveling by ship. Now with live journal!
Posts: 11803 | From: New York City "The City Carries On" | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
sharkshooter
Not your average shark
# 1589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by nicolemrw:
have you never heard of jury nullification, sharkshooter?
Yes. I just disagree with it.
--------------------
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [Psalm 19:14]
Posts: 7772 | From: Canada; Washington DC; Phoenix; it's complicated | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
Hosting
quote:
Originally posted by sharkshooter:
Are we done yet, or does anyone have anything new to say?
It doesn't matter if the things people post are new or not; if you are bored, don't click on this thread. Also, in earlier posts you seem to have Limbo confused with Dead Horses. Just because a previous discussion of this topic has been deemed interesting enough to save in Limbo doesn't mean the same ground can't be covered again. It also doesn't mean anyone is obliged to read the previous discussion.
In short, do not attempt to moderate or limit discussion.
RuthW
Purgatory host
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
sharkshooter
Not your average shark
# 1589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
... do not attempt to moderate or limit discussion.
...
Sorry.
--------------------
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [Psalm 19:14]
Posts: 7772 | From: Canada; Washington DC; Phoenix; it's complicated | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Deterrence can only theoretically work, surely, against professional killers. Hit men. And other serial killers with a strong sense of self-preservation. I suppose it might have inhibited the murderers of that poor WPC in Bradford too. But probably not. Premeditation and consequential reasoning isn't the strong suit of such morons.
I'd allow for capital punishment in theory, but never - or rather I can't think of an exception - in practice in civil society.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Littlelady
Shipmate
# 9616
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
However, do want to tackle something about this. People seem to almost think of sexual offenses as morally worse than murder. [No I am not saying that Sir Kevin said this specifically - just triggered my thoughts in this direction.] Paedophillia is a disgusting crime, as is rape, but are these acts not of a different order to murder ?
I think that's an interesting question. Paedophillia and rape can destroy a life; murder takes it. But then, if someone has been gang raped or brutalised in other ways as well (regardless of age), it could be said that they, too, have been robbed of their life.
Maybe it isn't so much that they are of a different order but of a similar order along different lines?
--------------------
'When ideas fail, words come in very handy' ~ Goethe
Posts: 3737 | From: home of the best Rugby League team in the universe | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
universalist
Shipmate
# 10318
|
Posted
What does the doctrine of Capital Punishment say to the one convicted?
"There is no hope for you--you are not redeemable, you are not worth saving. You are beyond God's power to forgive and save you in this life. Therefore, all that is left is death for you.
"Capital Punishment" is the crowning ritual which celebrates "The Administration of Death"--St.Paul
Posts: 66 | From: portland oregon | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
It only says that if it is invoked AFTER death, U. Not before. Before it it can only say we can't help you in this life, better luck in the next.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Kevin
Ship's Gaffer
# 3492
|
Posted
What I meant to say is that the paedophile is as evil as, or no better than, the murderer, and both should be incarcerated for life with no possibility of parole.
--------------------
If you board the wrong train, it is no use running along the corridor in the other direction Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Writing is currently my hobby, not yet my profession.
Posts: 30517 | From: White Hart Lane | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
Interested in this from a Scriptural perspective: Gen9:6 is often cited by pro- people as justification for CP - what do Shipmates make of it?
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Gen9:6 is often cited by pro- people as justification for CP - what do Shipmates make of it?
That it permits capital punishment for murder.
But (a) justice is better than mercy, and we can be Christlike by extending mercy
and (b) as others have said we can never be quite sure we've got the right convict and you can't undo an execution. So seeing as we are living in reasonbly settled and non-violent cultures with the ability to lock people up rather than do away with them, its better that we do that & not risk killing the wrong person. If we were living in little tribes in the desert things might be different.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Ken, this is dreadful, what are we going to do. We agree!
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
The Four Horsemen are surely nigh (or is that 'neigh')?!
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Campbellite
Ut unum sint
# 1202
|
Posted
News report that the Virginia governor grants clemency to a convicted killer, by commuting his sentence to life in prison.
I am glad I voted for him.
--------------------
I upped mine. Up yours.
Suffering for Jesus since 1966.
WTFWED?
Posts: 12001 | From: between keyboard and chair | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sir Kevin
Ship's Gaffer
# 3492
|
Posted
Good news indeed. I'm glad your candidate was elected.
--------------------
If you board the wrong train, it is no use running along the corridor in the other direction Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Writing is currently my hobby, not yet my profession.
Posts: 30517 | From: White Hart Lane | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by universalist:
What does the doctrine of Capital Punishment say to the one convicted?
"There is no hope for you--you are not redeemable, you are not worth saving. You are beyond God's power to forgive and save you in this life. Therefore, all that is left is death for you.
This is almost exactly the conclusion I have come to as well, although I think of it in social terms: "You will never contribute anything positive to society no matter how long you live. You will never change. Therefore we are going to kill you."
I refuse to even attempt to make that kind of determination about another person, and I wonder at how others seem to think they can. I believe capital punishment is about revenge, no matter how many additional justifications get trotted out. OliviaG
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Gen9:6 is often cited by pro- people as justification for CP - what do Shipmates make of it?
That it permits capital punishment for murder.
But (a) justice is better than mercy, and we can be Christlike by extending mercy
and (b) as others have said we can never be quite sure we've got the right convict and you can't undo an execution. So seeing as we are living in reasonbly settled and non-violent cultures with the ability to lock people up rather than do away with them, its better that we do that & not risk killing the wrong person. If we were living in little tribes in the desert things might be different.
But fundies and conevos, who tend to be pros- , will cite Gen 9 ad nauseam for saying that, whatever the goodness of your above arguments, the death penalty is mandated by God because Man is in His image, and that therefore it is God's will.
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
MightyAardvark
Apprentice
# 10255
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Kevin:
Where is it legal in the first world countries? Is it a deterrent?
No. The United States executes more people than the rest of the western world put together yet maintains homicide and violent crime rates grossly out of proportion to it's population.
QED
The death penalty is not an effective deterrent.
Posts: 19 | From: United Kingdom | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
Sorry, missed edit window.
I wanted to add that fundies will also say that Gen 9 predates the Law, and therefore it is no use arguing with them that we're under the New Convenant now etc.
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
MightyAardvark
Apprentice
# 10255
|
Posted
there is no biblically valid way of separating the laws of the old testament into laws we still follow and laws we don't follow. Either you follow them all (and stone homosexuals to death and dash the brains out of our children etc) or by the grace of God we are free from the need to abide by these rules.
Also...
God loves us all regardless of our misdeeds and I for one am not going to be a party to shivving up one of god's beloved children. That's just asking for an an almighty asskicking.
Posts: 19 | From: United Kingdom | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
Agreed, but they would say that since Gen 9:6 predates the giving of the OT Law, it is not part of it and is therefore of universal application.
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
OliviaG
I'm happy to make that determination without prejudice. Myra Hindley was a near classic case. She was UTTERLY humanly, socially irredeemable, no matter how penitent, repentant, forgiven by God; saved by the blood of the lamb. Which in her case still seemed questionable while STILL being ultimately open.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
MightyAardvark
Apprentice
# 10255
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Agreed, but they would say that since Gen 9:6 predates the giving of the OT Law, it is not part of it and is therefore of universal application.
They can make that argument if they want but I would still call it biblically invalid.
Jesus' new covenant replaced EVERYTHING that went before, regardless of where and when it came. Everything was washed away and made anew. The precise location it enjoys within the OT is not germane to the argument.
Posts: 19 | From: United Kingdom | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
I heard an interesting libertarian argument on how the death penalty should be implemented. The libertarian stated that because government sucks at everything it does, that the death penalty should be abolished. When asked what he would do if someone killed his sister he replied, "I would commit a crime myself, get thrown in jail and kill the bastard that killed my sister with my own hands."
Works for me.
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by OliviaG:
This is almost exactly the conclusion I have come to as well, although I think of it in social terms: "You will never contribute anything positive to society no matter how long you live. You will never change. Therefore we are going to kill you."
Yes. A hopelessly botched job of any kind suggests an incompetent craftsman.
As chilling as such a statement is when applied to an adult, AFAIK laws are on the books in various states whereby the statement can be made to children.
Whereas it seems that various other countries never have to make that statement.
What does that say? 'Only America manages to botch so badly the craft of child-rearing.'
Great testimony for what America stands for, huh.
I suppose once in awhile even a master craftsman messes up to that extent. But he doesn't go out and parade the fact.
--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by MightyAardvark:
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Agreed, but they would say that since Gen 9:6 predates the giving of the OT Law, it is not part of it and is therefore of universal application.
They can make that argument if they want but I would still call it biblically invalid.
Jesus' new covenant replaced EVERYTHING that went before, regardless of where and when it came. Everything was washed away and made anew. The precise location it enjoys within the OT is not germane to the argument.
They would doubtless argue that Jesus didn't replace the OT/ Law but fulfilled it
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mad Geo
Ship's navel gazer
# 2939
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
What does that say? 'Only America manages to botch so badly the craft of child-rearing.'
Great testimony for what America stands for, huh.
Yes, because all 297 Million of us 'Mericans are one homogenous case of bad parenting. We all beat our children, hand them crack pipes, and sell them to our neighbors for slaves. Yeah. Sure.
I sure hope I am misunderstanding you and you did not in fact make that ridiculous assertion.
quote:
Originally posted by OliviaG:
quote:
Originally posted by universalist:
What does the doctrine of Capital Punishment say to the one convicted?
"There is no hope for you--you are not redeemable, you are not worth saving. You are beyond God's power to forgive and save you in this life. Therefore, all that is left is death for you.
This is almost exactly the conclusion I have come to as well, although I think of it in social terms: "You will never contribute anything positive to society no matter how long you live. You will never change. Therefore we are going to kill you."
I refuse to even attempt to make that kind of determination about another person, and I wonder at how others seem to think they can. I believe capital punishment is about revenge, no matter how many additional justifications get trotted out. OliviaG
So basically you should never be on a jury because on a jury you have to determine if someone actually IS a murdering nasty scumbag of a person and inflict revenge on them in the form of prison or death.
If the DP is revenge, so is prison.
[ 01. December 2005, 16:18: Message edited by: Mad Geo ]
--------------------
Diax's Rake - "Never believe a thing simply because you want it to be true"
Posts: 11730 | From: People's Republic of SoCal | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
