• Win a RIX Storm S3 Thermal Imaging Scope!

    To enter, all you need to do is add an image of yourself at the range below!

    Join the contest

Religious Question For The Anti Death Penalty Crowd

Maser

Maser

American Nationalist
Full Member
Minuteman
    • May 17, 2006
    11,238
    18,009
    35
    /pol/
    www.youtube.com
    #1
    I know I probably titled this thread poorly because it's less about a question and more about another way of looking at this controversial topic in the Christian community.

    So it seems anytime capital punishment is brought up among Christians, there's always a group that with either bring up the "thou shall not kill" Commandment or say that only God gets to take a life and that the death penalty is playing God's role. However, the Commandment says "thou shall not murder" not kill. Us Christians are allowed to kill in defense of ourselves and/or others. So the way I see it is executing someone is not murder, but rather killing in defense because you are killing that person in order to defend society from a terrible person who has continued to harm to society and will continue to do so unless stopped permanently.

    I get that this isn't exactly an elaborate thread and all, but I wanted to keep it simple and to the point.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: 232593, stefan73, Farmerhunter and 6 others
    #6
    That's how I became anti-death penalty--not such much the "Thou shalt not kill" (Often translated as "Thou shalt not murder") but given how the justice system is and how its applied, the ultimate sin of the state is the deprivation of life.

    Lock em in the slammer for life though? No problem.

    Or as Tolkein put it:

    Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement.​

     
    • Like
    Reactions: W54/XM-388, Hecouldgoalltheway, MK20 and 3 others
    #7
    OREGUN said:
    With that said, do we trust our government and our criminal justice system enough to let them make those judgements? That’s another question entirely.
    Click to expand...
    I agree. There is support for capital punishment in both the Old Testament and The New Testament. However, from 1973 to 2022 there were 184 condemned death row inmates that were wrongfully convicted and subsequently exonerated.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: W54/XM-388, Hecouldgoalltheway, jr81452 and 1 other person
    #9
    complex issue FS with many related questions. some of my take is: prison costs tax slaves $s. they are being expropriated to keep the worst offenders alive at that cost of $100,00K/yr (?). can't see how that = "justice" for society.
    my take on money. money = life. how does 1 get $ in an ethical fashion? work which = time spent in the job,time spent learning it,time spent finding it. by job i mean neurosurgeon,ditch digger,whatever. all you are born with is time,an amount you have no foreknowledge of or real control over. you trade it for food,shelter,toys,whatever. if someone steals your property thru force or fraud they steal your time,a piece of your life.
    this brings a larger question about society's role in law,enforcement,judgement and sanctions.
    the other problem is the incompetence,stupidity and corruption of defense,cops,prosecutors,lawyers,politicians and the population. it is just a game and winning the game often has nothing to do with guilt or innocence. in fact,frequently an inverse relationship.
     
    #10
    The idea of a death penalty isn't a bad practice.
    Given the crime meets an equally heinous level.
    The problem is the worthiness in those who carry out the sentence.
    Thou shall not murder isn't the same as thou shall not kill.
    Cost to those who finance life sentences is also a question of magnitude.

    Several on this site work directly with inmates.
    They can speak best on recidivism.

    R
     
    Last edited:
    #13
    According to AI: "The phrase "an eye for an eye" originates from the Bible, specifically the Book of Exodus 21:24, where it states "life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.". This principle, also known as "lex talionis," essentially means that the punishment should be equal to the crime committed, with the idea of a direct retaliation measure for measure. "
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Big Phish and mosin46
    #14
    B y r o n said:
    According to AI: "The phrase "an eye for an eye" originates from the Bible, specifically the Book of Exodus 21:24, where it states "life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.". This principle, also known as "lex talionis," essentially means that the punishment should be equal to the crime committed, with the idea of a direct retaliation measure for measure. "
    Click to expand...
    But Christ rebukes that philosophy with “you have heard it said, an eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth. But I say to you offer no resistance to one who is evil. When someone strikes you on your right cheek, turn the other one to him as well.”

    I don’t believe he meant with that statement that we should not defend ourselves from an attack. I think his point was to nuke the idea of revenge ever being justified by proposing the complete opposite as being righteous. But I could be wrong.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: UKDslayer and Charmingmander
    #15
    I used to be pro death penalty, but over time my views on that have changed.

    Imagine observing a conflict between two of your own children, both of whom you love boundlessly. Under what circumstances would you be OK with one child killing the other? Because this is how God sees it.

    I think if one child was about to cause severe pain or misery or death to the other (who is innocent of wrongdoing), then the innocent one defending themself with deadly force would likely not incur blame from the parent for doing so. But regardless, the parent would still be grieved and screaming “No No No STOP!” the whole time.

    I certainly do not believe a normal parent would tell one child to kill the other after the fact as a punishment for any offense committed. That is revenge, not defense.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: W54/XM-388
    #17
    So, if a guy has proven himself to like children, then that is not a habit that can be changed. It’s been proven. So in that case should he be allowed to live on considering he has actually ruined however many lives? I say, the death penalty is biblical and right. Our justice system is another question entirely…
     
    #18
    LuckyLuke80 said:
    So, if a guy has proven himself to like children, then that is not a habit that can be changed. It’s been proven. So in that case should he be allowed to live on considering he has actually ruined however many lives? I say, the death penalty is biblical and right. Our justice system is another question entirely…
    Click to expand...
    Incarceration protects society from the pedo. Killing him is unnecessary. Killing to save the money of incarcerating him isn’t a just reason to kill.

    As long as we are alive, God can use us to do his will. It’s not our place to deprive Him of the chance.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: W54/XM-388 and Devildog
    #20
    This is an issue of categories.

    Those who govern legitimately “possess the sword” — it is their duty to pursue justice. They must punish evildoers.

    Christ’s commands are to his followers. (the church) It is not part of the Christian ethic to personally avenge yourself when you’ve been wronged. That, in no way, precludes a Christian from defending themselves or others in order to preserve life. (Defending one’s self becomes a matter of wisdom)

    I am pro death penalty, as a matter of principle. I am against the death penalty, in most cases, as I don’t trust those that are dispensing justice.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: D_TROS and doubloon
    #21
    Impressive respectful discussion.

    a few thoughts.

    As a Christian I am much more concerned with the innocent lives lost to abortion than the few evil monsters we remove from earth each year via death penalty.

    No matter my beliefs of what the Bible says in the old and new testaments, my trust in our govt to get it right is so low, it is virtually immeasurable.

    As a father and a person who’s life revolves around helping folks, I 100% want to see pedo’s eliminated.
    They are demonic evil and nothing more.
    And then, as mentioned above, I also know that there is a chance, if imprisoned, they might hear God’s word, accept Him, repent, and the evil will be cast out. So….
    Issue is, they go to prison, eschew anything related to God or faith, and re-offend a disturbingly high percentage of the time.

    And we need prison reform.
    I dont like “prison justice”. Allowing it or encouraging it is no different than being the thug doing it.
    Like ordering a hit one someone in a moral/ethical light IMO.
    And I dont like soft prison. Hard manual labor. No TV. No AC. Bland sucky food that gives proper nutrients. Serious work to stop drugs and contraband. No conjugal visits. Zero tolerance for violence.

    Not a complete collection and just thoughts I have on it.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: D_TROS and Sum Ting Wong
    #22
    Namekagon said:
    Incarceration protects society from the pedo. Killing him is unnecessary. Killing to save the money of incarcerating him isn’t a just reason to kill.

    As long as we are alive, God can use us to do his will. It’s not our place to deprive Him of the chance.
    Click to expand...
    So, only incarcerate till the end of his life without the possibility of ever getting out for any reason? Do you know that the recidivism rate is around 90% for child sex offenders? So would you be willing to leave your daughter/granddaughter/niece alone with such a person.
     
    #23
    Another thought of mine is the false idea of castration (no matter what the method). It has also been proven soundly to not work at all. Just creates a very angry predator. But this is getting off topic of the OP. I have read the Bible though more than once, and I’ve grown up hearing preaching. I can find no evidence in the Bible to make me believe that that death penalty is unbiblical.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: powdahound76
    #24
    Collin Powell, George Bush, CIA and all of Congress that voted for the invasion of Iraq on false pretences killed how many? Shouldn't they be charged? How about the doctors that forced people onto ventilators during covid while denying ivermectin? Fauchi, Burks and the rest of them?
    While there's plenty of truly guilty like Jeffrey Dalhmer that should be executed I don't trust the police or the legal system to give them that authority. For those above I'd like to see them rot in prison after being stripped of all their wealth. Their family should not benefit from their evil.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: FWoo45, powdahound76, W54/XM-388 and 2 others
    #26
    -God told Abraham, kill me a son.

    -Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, “Take vengeance on the Midianites for the sons of Israel; afterward you will be.

    -David ran and stood over him. He took hold of the Philistine’s sword and drew it from the sheath. After he killed him, he cut off his head with the sword.

    - Cain told this to his brother Abel. And when they were in the field, Cain stood up against his brother Abel and killed him.

    The point being is the Bible is one giant history book of killing, murder and war. When talking about killing, the commandment was very obvious referring to murder, however, “murder” is man made construct. Not all killings are murders but all murders are killings.

    I don’t believe that a commandment would be built around a man made law. I believe that “murder” is the ”you know in your heart that was wrong” type of killings.

    So going back to the OP…are you rationalizing or do you feel in your heart that killing in execution is necessary?
     
    #27
    I give thanks to God. I have read the Bible a few times. As a teenager and even going to Church of LDS during some summers, our mother would have us reading the Bible and Gray's commentary and talking about passages.

    I also believe in capital punishment and the death penalty. It is a matter of logistics. A bad guy is not going to change and the world is safer without him. I do not think it is playing God. It is still up to God whether the criminal is saved or not. See, I don't think I can interpret or speak for God or that I know all of the thought processes He has, if any of them.

    I also don't think it is impossible for God to work through Man. To say that he can't is, again, as an arrogant relatively hairless bipedal ape (Thanks CS Lewis,) that is presuming limitations on God. I know we are made in His image. That does not mean that He has our limitations.

    There is only one way to get rid of violence in prison. That is with the needle, chair, rifle, rope.

    So, then, delegation of duties. Let God worry if someone is to be saved or not. Do we as humans "kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out"?

    And how would I reconcile that with the Christian requirement to turn the other cheek? Because Christ also said, "I come not to bring peace into the world but a double-edged sword."

    Murder seems to imply intent and killing sounds more like either self-defense or manslaughter. For example, a DUI death is not from intention, it is from negligence of the driver. Therefore, DUI death is killing but not "murder" in my thinking.

    And yes, the Bible has seeming contradictions in it, having been transcribed by Man. Which does not disprove the existence of God. Sarah turns to salt after looking back at all the gay people burning in Sodom. Lot and his daughters escape to a cave. Lot gets drunk and his daughters have sex with him to help repopulate the world.

    So, I guess I will be contradictory and approve of capital punishment and then thank God we are safer from at least one bad guy.
     
    #28
    Why pay for complete wastes of oxygen to keep living when we can remove them instead?

    Morality is subjective depending on a plethora of factors from individual to individual.


    Personally I believe in the death penalty for littering let alone for pedos, murderers, etc. My opinion on that was formed before I was even a teenager and hasn't changed.


    Also, I find it ridiculous when people quote the Old Testament for these kinds of things. The old covenant is irrelevant. Thou shalt not murder isn't even right from what I recall last time I looked into translations. IIRC it's more like thou shalt not kill without just cause.
     
    #29
    Adding my own .02.

    I agree that the "commandment" says "Thou Shall not 'Murder,' not 'kill'." There is a discussion going on in religious circles about the precise definition of the Hebrew word in the commandment, but the consensus is that it is "murder" not "kill." In my own denomination, the 6th commandment reads, "Thou shalt do no murder." Sorry, Cecil B. DeMille... you F'ed that one up!

    As for Capital Punishment, I reiterate my my "single question" philosophy that we must all ask and answer for ourselves. "Are there crimes and circumstances for which the 'forfeiture of life' is that necessary and sufficient measure of justice?" Yes, we all have a "Right to Life." However, there are some things we can do with that life.... some extremely evil, horrible, terrible things that, in the end, merit the forfeiture of that life. It's simply a matter of justice... nothing else. Justice for the victims of those crimes. In all this discussion about Capital Punishment, everyone seems to forget about the victims and the justice they deserve. I don't believe in any other factors about Capital Punishment. It's not a deterrent (nor should it be) or recidivism, or any of those other things. It's simply the "just and appropriate punishment" for the crime already committed, not what crimes might be committed in the future. And, yes, I realize that the following might sound a bit mean and unforgiving of me, but how well a condemned person turns over a new leaf during their time on death row should be no factor at all in re: the execution of the original sentence. Again, this is not about what kind of life they may live in the future, but what kind of life they lived in the past and what they did in the past. We can be a very "forgiving" people. But what we can't do is "absolve responsibility" for what has happened. They must still pay for their crime.

    So, the argument comes down to, "How much should they pay?". If you believe that there are crimes and circumstances that merit the "forfeiture of life." then you believe in Capital Punishment. And yes, I do believe that. If you don't believe that there are such crimes and circumstances, then you don't believe in it and prefer "Life without Parole." It's up to you. That said, yes, there is very much the concern about "corruption" in the Justice System and how that may affect trials and sentencing. This is what I think we need to focus on... fixing that corruption... not eliminating Capital punishment as a punishment because we can't fix/eradicate the corruption (or it's too hard to do so). We need to fix the system and make it work. Again, not because I like having people executed... I absolutely do not. But I do believe it is that "necessary and sufficient measure of justice" for certain crimes and circumstances, and the victims of those crimes deserve that level of justice. Since they aren't here anymore to fight for themselves, we need to do it for them.
     
    #31
    salks said:
    One of the objectives of punishment is to deter others from committing crime. I have no trouble with the death penalty. They should make it public and painful. Public castration for a pedophile .
    Click to expand...
    Absolutely the point of the death penalty. The idea is: men aren’t hung for stealing horse, but rather, men are hung so horses won’t be stolen. If a person makes a mistake that is understandable, and should be punished, but not by execution. Child moleststion and acts like that are not a mistake, but absolutely are a choice. The idea of castration sounds like a good solution to us, but it’s been proven ineffective because the problem is in the mind, not the ball sack. Physical and chemical castration were tested a couple decades ago and didn’t work to stop criminals, only make them a more angry criminal
     
    #32
    I was going to mention (but FX51 beat me to it) that you'd have to look at the original Hebrew and Greek origins of the words "murder" and "kill" to get a more accurate answer to your question.

    My personal philosophy has always been that the decision to execute someone should be left to the families of the victims. They're the ones with skin in the game.

    If you saw a rabid animal attacking other animals and probably infecting them, you'd kill it to protect the other animals. By analogy, humans are animals.

    Though Ankeny made a good point in his (or her) post.
     
    Last edited:
    #33
    LuckyLuke80 said:
    So, only incarcerate till the end of his life without the possibility of ever getting out for any reason? Do you know that the recidivism rate is around 90% for child sex offenders? So would you be willing to leave your daughter/granddaughter/niece alone with such a person.
    Click to expand...
    For high crimes where the death penalty is used, life imprisonment would accomplish the same protection of society without depriving life.
     
    #35
    Namekagon said:
    For high crimes where the death penalty is used, life imprisonment would accomplish the same protection of society without depriving life.
    Click to expand...

    If it *were*.... Life imprisonment. That is never guaranteed. As long as the BG is alive, there is always a chance that their legal team may find some stupid technicality that will cause a reversal of the conviction and sentencing. Capital Punishment solves that problem.
     
    #37
    LuckyLuke80 said:
    Absolutely the point of the death penalty. The idea is: men aren’t hung for stealing horse, but rather, men are hung so horses won’t be stolen. If a person makes a mistake that is understandable, and should be punished, but not by execution. Child moleststion and acts like that are not a mistake, but absolutely are a choice. The idea of castration sounds like a good solution to us, but it’s been proven ineffective because the problem is in the mind, not the ball sack. Physical and chemical castration were tested a couple decades ago and didn’t work to stop criminals, only make them a more angry criminal
    Click to expand...

    I have to disagree. Yes, executing someone may very well prevent future crimes, but that is a "collateral benefit." The primary point of the punishment should always be the consequence for the crime already committed, not what might be committed in the future

    I do agree, though, that crimes like "child molestation" (in addition to murder) merit the forfeiture of life. In essence, the BG has "murdered" that child... not physically, but mentally/spiritually. A lot harder for a child to recover from that than, perhaps a more mature adult. I mean, it's hard for the adult too but, hopefully, they have a bit more maturity and some more combat tools to help deal with it.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: doubloon
    #38
    How many people have been exonerated due to DNA?


    6 years, for a total across the 24 cases of 631 years spent in prison for crimes they did not commit. Few of these exonerees have been adequately compensated. The Innocence Project reports 375 DNA exonerations in criminal cases between 1989 and 2020.

    I’m not gonna weigh in on the moral / biblical discussion, that will be between you and your God.
    What I will say, is that capital punishment has been shown statistically to NOT deter crime. Moreover, the above stats show that the legal system doesn’t always get things correct. It’s all good to throw the switch or push the syringe, until it’s someone close, caught up in a botched case led by an overzealous detective / legal system.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: stefan73 and Namekagon
    #39
    akg102 said:
    This is an issue of categories.

    Those who govern legitimately “possess the sword” — it is their duty to pursue justice. They must punish evildoers.
    Click to expand...

    I would disagree with that very much.
    Those who govern are usually actually very bad corrupt power hungry people.

    If something is licit for the state, it must be licit for the citizens
    If something is illicit for the citizens, it must be illicit for the state

    People not enforcing that is why we have Uniform Hangers going around thinking they can just kill anyone they want and get away with it.

    It's also why folks seem to be fine with power mad politicians and greedy corporations telling the "good folks" to go kill hundreds of thousands of people, many of whom innocent, many others simply defending their homelands, so corporations and power mad satanists can have more power and wealth and control.

    Given the top to bottom corruption of the judicial system and how much proven corruption and evil there is in "law enforcement" it's very hard to agree to let them do something that can't be undone when they already murder innocent people far to often and lie about it.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Namekagon
    #40
    akg102 said:
    This is an issue of categories.

    Those who govern legitimately “possess the sword” — it is their duty to pursue justice. They must punish evildoers.

    Christ’s commands are to his followers. (the church) It is not part of the Christian ethic to personally avenge yourself when you’ve been wronged. That, in no way, precludes a Christian from defending themselves or others in order to preserve life. (Defending one’s self becomes a matter of wisdom)

    I am pro death penalty, as a matter of principle. I am against the death penalty, in most cases, as I don’t trust those that are dispensing justice.
    Click to expand...
    I find this the most interesting argument in the thread so far. The idea that God’s will for government, and the duties of government, differ from those of individual believers.

    I do think in many ways this is true. For example, I think Christianity places a responsibility on us to give to the poor. However, that doesn’t mean government should be redistributing wealth. Taxes and welfare programs are not charity. So clearly the role of government is different from the individual.

    While I’m not convinced by this argument that the death penalty is an appropriate action of a Godly society, it it an intriguing one. I think the reality is that the death penalty is not necessarily immoral, but the question is, is it God’s will for us?
     
    #41
    Ronws said:
    . . . Sarah turns to salt after looking back at all the gay people burning in Sodom. . . .
    Click to expand...
    AI Overview

    The statement "Sarah turns to salt after looking back at all the gay people burning in Sodom" is incorrect; in the Bible story, it is actually Lot's wife who turns into a pillar of salt after looking back at the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, not Sarah, and the story does not explicitly mention the sexual orientation of the people in the cities.
     
    #42
    W54/XM-388 said:
    I would disagree with that very much.
    Those who govern are usually actually very bad corrupt power hungry people.

    If something is licit for the state, it must be licit for the citizens
    If something is illicit for the citizens, it must be illicit for the state

    People not enforcing that is why we have Uniform Hangers going around thinking they can just kill anyone they want and get away with it.

    It's also why folks seem to be fine with power mad politicians and greedy corporations telling the "good folks" to go kill hundreds of thousands of people, many of whom innocent, many others simply defending their homelands, so corporations and power mad satanists can have more power and wealth and control.

    Given the top to bottom corruption of the judicial system and how much proven corruption and evil there is in "law enforcement" it's very hard to agree to let them do something that can't be undone when they already murder innocent people far to often and lie about it.
    Click to expand...
    You were typing while I was. I think this is the most interesting part of this discussion….whether or not the moral requirements of the individual are different from that of the state.

    On one had, you have the example of Alma giving by individuals vs wealth redistribution by government. Here it seems the moral choice for the individual is immoral for the state. But for other things you are correct, the evil intentions of the state result in good people “just doin my job” which is a terrible excuse for immorality.

    It might be that you are correct, and we should expect our government to act as an individual would be expected to act. And in times where that seems inappropriate, (such as forced wealth redistribution) it’s inappropriate only due to poor execution on governments part.
     
    #43
    Fx51LP308 said:
    I do agree, though, that crimes like "child molestation" (in addition to murder) merit the forfeiture of life. In essence, the BG has "murdered" that child... not physically, but mentally/spiritually. A lot harder for a child to recover from that than, perhaps a more mature adult. I mean, it's hard for the adult too but, hopefully, they have a bit more maturity and some more combat tools to help deal with it.
    Click to expand...

    I know that seems very popular with all the chest thumping type

    BUT you are wrong!

    Murdering a child is a different thing entirely than abusing one.
    Murder is much more serious than sexual abuse.

    Also remember that a huge amount of "child abuse" allegations often are outright lies fabricated by those who want better deals in divorces or want to get back at someone or want to ruin someone's life. You may not care now, but you might care one day when your wife decides hey let's convince the kids to help me get ALL the stuff in this divorce instead of just half.

    Plenty of folks were abused as children, I'd actually say huge percentages depending on when where and what culture, but still went on to have lives and families of their own and got over it. When "the virtue of being a victim" was not a thing, folks tended to get on with life, put the trauma in a box and get to living. I seriously doubt looking back most of them would have wished to be murdered.

    Also if you want to say they should get the death penalty, then what reason would anybody have for letting a kid live? Might as well just kill them so there is less chance of them testifying against you. Might as well kill any witnesses too since hey after the first one all the rest are free.

    I'm going to say that no, you can only use the death penalty for special circumstances extra bad murders.
    BUT also given the state of our justice system we can't allow the government much power to do irreversible things.

    Now if someone comes across someone violently assaulting / raping / thugging or such and well in the effort to put and immediate stop to the action the perpetrator gets dead, well that's just life, and the same if it's a citizen or Uniform doing the stopping.
    BUT once they are stopped and now in custody and such, then you are strictly only doing revenge (which most folks don't understand "justice" is often based on revenge). So the stakes are different.


    Now your citizen may want to go do some private revenge and get old testament style justice on someone who harmed them or their loved ones, be it another citizen that did it or a Uniform Hanger that did it.
    That is a whole different discussion...
     
    #44
    Namekagon said:
    You were typing while I was. I think this is the most interesting part of this discussion….whether or not the moral requirements of the individual are different from that of the state.

    On one had, you have the example of Alma giving by individuals vs wealth redistribution by government. Here it seems the moral choice for the individual is immoral for the state. But for other things you are correct, the evil intentions of the state result in good people “just doin my job” which is a terrible excuse for immorality.

    It might be that you are correct, and we should expect our government to act as an individual would be expected to act. And in times where that seems inappropriate, (such as forced wealth redistribution) it’s inappropriate only due to poor execution on governments part.
    Click to expand...


    When it comes to "wealth redistribution" it is ALWAYS wrong when done by force / coercion unless it is to specifically take ill gotten gains from those specific persons who oppressed, stole from, enslaved or harmed others and give it back to those specific persons who were stolen from or harmed or oppressed, or enslaved (with the government taking nothing for themselves to avoid doing justice for money). None of this "well hundreds of years ago xxx colour/race/creed/group did this so now we want to be mean to xxx that we can call similar because well..."

    Giving to the poor should always be voluntary and because people want it.
    Charity is NOT a right (despite what the "professional poor" and "professional grifters" try to claim).

    When the citizens freely give as they feel to deserving needy people, then it's righteous
    When the government uses guns and uniform hangers to take money from the productive working citizens to hand out to others, it always becomes an abomination.

    Something to remember is the "government" should not be given some abstract entity status when it comes to morals and right and wrong.
    The "government" is made up of individual people, each with their own agency and their own responsibility to do right.
    Nothing happens without individuals making choices and doing actions.

    Just because they are "government" doesn't give them any free passes to do things that you would not allow a citizen.
    It's why we have an out of control government, because the good folks started letting people get away with "just following orders" or well "take it up with the government and courts" and stopped holding each individual accountable for their actions.


    It's the same problem where corporations get away with doing all kinds of evil because the good folks refuse to hold each individual who made the decisions or acted on the decisions, responsible for their actions.

    Also of note is that in the Old Testament where a lot of folks justify death penalty and other things, when it started out, there was no "go have the government do it". Rather all the people had to get together and do it themselves and have their own hands in it.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: LeftyJason and Namekagon
    #45
    Moral issues aside we have to weight the pros and cons. Some of the issues are the DA's that will do anything and push just to get a conviction to move their career ahead.
    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...-new-dna-evidence-frees-hawaii-man-rcna193315Hawaii man freed after 30 years in prison thanks to DNA

    www.forensicmag.com

    CBI: Forensic Scientist Manipulated Over 650 Cases

    The Colorado Bureau of Investigation (CBI) announced the findings of an internal affairs investigation into a former CBI DNA scientist accused of data manipulation of DNA test results.
    www.forensicmag.com
    Forensic Scientist falsified information in over 650 cases

    If someone is caught in the act, cool, lets take care of business or if the evidence is without a question 100% I am good with corporal punishment.

    Religiously? This is challenging, kill vs murder. Is it right? I don't know.

    "1. Leviticus 20:27 – “A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them.”
    2. Leviticus 24:16 – “And he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the Lord, shall be put to death.”
    3. Deuteronomy 13:10 – “And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the Lord thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.”
    4. Deuteronomy 17:5 – “Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.”
    5. Deuteronomy 21:21 – “And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.”
    6. Ezekiel 16:40 – “They shall also bring up a company against thee, and they shall stone thee with stones, and thrust thee through with their swords.”"https://encouragingbibleverses.org/bible-verses-about-stoning-to-death/
     
    #46
    W54/XM-388 said:
    I know that seems very popular with all the chest thumping type

    BUT you are wrong!
    Click to expand...

    No, I'm not!

    W54/XM-388 said:
    Murdering a child is a different thing entirely than abusing one.
    Click to expand...

    I agree.

    W54/XM-388 said:
    Murder is much more serious than sexual abuse.
    Click to expand...

    I disagree. At least with Murder, the actual victim suffers only momentarily but, once dead, they no longer suffer. It's the victim's survivors that suffer and, in general society that suffers. A child molestation victim is still alive and suffers with that for the rest of their whole life. They are scared for life. And as stated above, without the "maturity" tools an adult has to help combat the trauma, it's as if they were dead. Those crimes merit the forfeiture of life... pure and smiple. No chest thumping, just reality.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: stefan73
    #47
    Namekagon said:
    Incarceration protects society from the pedo. Killing him is unnecessary. Killing to save the money of incarcerating him isn’t a just reason to kill.

    As long as we are alive, God can use us to do his will. It’s not our place to deprive Him of the chance.
    Click to expand...
    This seems good. Us tax payers spend a lot of $$$ to avoid the responsibility of making life/death decisions. Life is precious in Canada and the US. Elsewhere, generally it’s a few hundred $$ at best.
     
    #48
    To kill or harm innocents is the greatest crime. Murder is heinous but using sexual assault, rape as a weapon like hamas did is even worse. That is torture and it is something the victim has to live with daily. Which is why I can't stand the shitbags that support hamas, palestine and the weaponizing of sexual assault.

    Is killing a murderer bad? Religiously, ethically, morally?
     
    #50
    Fx51LP308 said:
    I disagree. At least with Murder, the actual victim suffers only momentarily but, once dead, they no longer suffer. It's the victim's survivors that suffer and, in general society that suffers.
    Click to expand...

    Perhaps you should go like talk to folks who actually had real actual child sexual abuse done to them and ask them if they would prefer to be dead.
    You'll probably find a lot of folks disagreeing with your idea that somehow they are better off dead.

    I've known well folks that went the whole "I'm a virtuous victim" route and refused to move on, as well as plenty of those who made the choice to move on from there and have good, full, happy lives.

    It's pretty stupid to say that someone is better off dead rather than having the chance to get over things and move on.

    Again it's the stupid "victim culture" that we have in this country.

    Also you think that with murder it's all so "momentary" obviously you haven't studied enough real actual cases, usually there is a whole lot else that goes along with the murder.
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.

    Similar threads

    PatMiles
    The Philippine vice president publicly threatens to have the president assassinated!
    Replies
    25
    Views
    980
    Edsel
    Edsel
    lonegunman762x51
    007, Daniel Craig
    Replies
    49
    Views
    2K
    Ichi
    Ichi
    PatMiles
    House GOP Bill Proposes Sending Anti-Israel, Pro-Hamas College Rioters to Gaza for Community Service.
    Replies
    13
    Views
    523
    ggmanning
    G
    PatMiles
    Anti-incarceration SJW activist dies after brutal robbery in Oakland
    Replies
    43
    Views
    2K
    308pirate
    308pirate
    lash
    Evolution May Be Purposeful And It’s Freaking Scientists Out
    Replies
    152
    Views
    5K
    lash
    lash
    Top Bottom
    Back
    Home
    Forums
    Merch
    Alerts