A win for western civilization.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/nebraska-abol...b_lastword

(05-28-2015 12:55 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  A win for western civilization.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/nebraska-abol...b_lastword

Thou shall not kill

(05-28-2015 12:58 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(05-28-2015 12:55 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  A win for western civilization.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/nebraska-abol...b_lastword

Thou shall not kill

Bad translation. The 6th commandment more accurately reads as 'thou shalt not murder'. Regardless I'm in favor of eliminating the Death Penalty.

I understand why you'd want to get rid of the death penalty. US Justice can get things wrong from time to time, and you don't want to fry someone over something that they didn't directly do (or were framed for).

There are two ways to look at the death penalty, at least to me.

1) IF one is a Christian, then I imagine (no matter your denomination) you believe that there is forgiveness for all sins through true repentance (blasphemes against the Holy Spirit were sins only possible when Jesus physically walked the Earth and performed His miracles). This includes murder. I imagine that you would also agree that man is no judge. Man should be in no position to judge that someone should be killed. The death penalty, in many cases, effectively eliminates the possibility of repentance. If you aren't a Christian, then this reasoning obviously doesn't apply to you, which is fine.

2) Whether you're Christian, secular, or whatever.....this justice system is extremely flawed (granted there is no other kind of justice system). There are very very few cases of absolute certainty, not only of the physical murder itself, but the circumstances surrounding said murder. How many people will have to be wrongly executed or sit on death row for years only to be posthumously proven not guilty via DNA testing or some other source? It's bad enough that folks have wrongly gone to prison for 40+ years, but killing an innocent man is obviously a whole different ballgame.

(05-28-2015 01:11 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  2) Whether you're Christian, secular, or whatever.....this justice system is extremely flawed (granted there is no other kind of justice system). There are very very few cases of absolute certainty, not only of the physical murder itself, but the circumstances surrounding said murder. How many people will have to be wrongly executed or sit on death row for years only to be posthumously proven not guilty via DNA testing or some other source? It's bad enough that folks have wrongly gone to prison for 40+ years, but killing an innocent man is obviously a whole different ballgame.

You can give someone the final 25-30 years of their life back after a wrongful imprisonment. You can at least say "sorry" and clear their name. You can't dig up the dead.

(05-28-2015 01:11 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  There are two ways to look at the death penalty, at least to me.

1) IF one is a Christian, then I imagine (no matter your denomination) you believe that there is forgiveness for all sins through true repentance (blasphemes against the Holy Spirit were sins only possible when Jesus physically walked the Earth and performed His miracles). This includes murder. I imagine that you would also agree that man is no judge. Man should be in no position to judge that someone should be killed. The death penalty, in many cases, effectively eliminates the possibility of repentance. If you aren't a Christian, then this reasoning obviously doesn't apply to you, which is fine.

2) Whether you're Christian, secular, or whatever.....this justice system is extremely flawed (granted there is no other kind of justice system). There are very very few cases of absolute certainty, not only of the physical murder itself, but the circumstances surrounding said murder. How many people will have to be wrongly executed or sit on death row for years only to be posthumously proven not guilty via DNA testing or some other source? It's bad enough that folks have wrongly gone to prison for 40+ years, but killing an innocent man is obviously a whole different ballgame.

I lean more towards your second POV. I'm not 100% sure an innocent man hasn't been executed, most research seems to think we've never crossed that bridge, but it's such an unforgivable mistake that I don't there is any acceptable margin for error that would justify keeping capital punishment in place.

Living in Nebraska is punishment enough.

from No Spin Zone by Bill O’Reilly, p. 102). O’Reilly then stated, “I don’t believe he [Jesus] would be embracing the death penalty if he were here today.” Bush: “We can both agree on this.”

Maybe Texas will ramp up the # of executions to make up for it.

(05-28-2015 01:02 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(05-28-2015 12:58 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(05-28-2015 12:55 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  A win for western civilization.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/nebraska-abol...b_lastword

Thou shall not kill

Bad translation. The 6th commandment more accurately reads as 'thou shalt not murder'. Regardless I'm in favor of eliminating the Death Penalty.

Generally agreed. However, I'd reserve the death Penalty for situations where life incarceration is not practically available: on a space mission for example, where one crew member wants to annihilate the others, and will not be restrained. Or on a castaway desert island survival scenario. In cases like that, it would be wise to retain the death penalty option for the absolute extreme situations. In most of America today, it is way overused, and too expensive. Welfare for lawyers, if you will.

(05-28-2015 01:45 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(05-28-2015 01:02 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(05-28-2015 12:58 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(05-28-2015 12:55 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  A win for western civilization.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/nebraska-abol...b_lastword

Thou shall not kill

Bad translation. The 6th commandment more accurately reads as 'thou shalt not murder'. Regardless I'm in favor of eliminating the Death Penalty.

Generally agreed. However, I'd reserve the death Penalty for situations where life incarceration is not practically available: on a space mission for example, where one crew member wants to annihilate the others, and will not be restrained. Or on a castaway desert island survival scenario. In cases like that, it would be wise to retain the death penalty option for the absolute extreme situations. In most of America today, it is way overused, and too expensive. Welfare for lawyers, if you will.

The situations you've described are extreme and honestly could be classified as either extra-judicial or self defense.

(05-28-2015 01:11 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  There are two ways to look at the death penalty, at least to me.

1) IF one is a Christian, then I imagine (no matter your denomination) you believe that there is forgiveness for all sins through true repentance (blasphemes against the Holy Spirit were sins only possible when Jesus physically walked the Earth and performed His miracles). This includes murder. I imagine that you would also agree that man is no judge. Man should be in no position to judge that someone should be killed. The death penalty, in many cases, effectively eliminates the possibility of repentance. If you aren't a Christian, then this reasoning obviously doesn't apply to you, which is fine.

If you're a Christian, then you generally believe that repentance can happen at heaven's gate... and what comes next is far better than what is here... so 'death' here is essentially meaningless to heaven. You might even be rewarded in heaven. You wouldn't believe that death on earth eliminates in any way the possibility of repentance. Capital punishment is the punishment meted out by man for breaking man's laws. God punishes murderers whether or not Man does, and rewards the righteous, whether or not man does.

OF COURSE people on death row often repent. That doesn't mean it's genuine. It also doesn't mean it is. Generally the death penalty is reserved for people who seem pathological, in which case their repentance is entirely in doubt. We don't execute women who kill their husbands in fits of rage.... unless it happens more than twice. Are they sorry they did it, or just sorry they got caught? Who knows. We don't... but if you believe in God, you believe HE does.

Quote:2) Whether you're Christian, secular, or whatever.....this justice system is extremely flawed (granted there is no other kind of justice system). There are very very few cases of absolute certainty, not only of the physical murder itself, but the circumstances surrounding said murder. How many people will have to be wrongly executed or sit on death row for years only to be posthumously proven not guilty via DNA testing or some other source? It's bad enough that folks have wrongly gone to prison for 40+ years, but killing an innocent man is obviously a whole different ballgame.

Minor clarification. You don't really prove someone not guilty. You either prove them guilty or you fail to do so. I believe some evidence has been presented which DID support guilt and now doesn't support guilt, but that doesn't mean they were proven not guilty. What I mean is, nobody has been convicted of murder simply because their DNA was on the victim... but it is one of likely numerous pieces of information... and evidence that their DNA isn't on the victim doesn't prove their innocence. That is essentially why it takes so long to execute people. Is it perfect? Of course not. It can't be. But neither is allowing guilty people (who often offend again) to go free on technicalities... and we do that seemingly every day.

I guess I just don't believe that being wrong once (because, if or when that happens) means that the thousands of times we WEREN'T wrong were somehow 'not worth it'. I think we simply continue to refine the process and increase the scrutiny with which we examine these cases. Make a system that is solid, ever better... and not just say that unless it is absolutely and undeniably perfect, we can't use it.

" Love your enemy"

An eye for an eye...that's what dad always says.

(05-28-2015 03:55 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  " Love your enemy"

Seems you might not understand that statement. Love does not mean letting someone walk all over you; indeed, sometimes one has to be harsh in doing what is considered the loving thing.

Knowing the cliche's is different than truly understanding them, Fit.