What's new
By:

Is the death penalty morally wrong?

dalamon said:
Yes. Plus, evidence shows that it's more expensive than life sentencing. Rather open-and-shut, IMO.
Click to expand...

It doesn't have to be and certain people have no place in our society by any measure. So what do you suggest? Deportation?
 
Stoked said:
It doesn't have to be and certain people have no place in our society by any measure. So what do you suggest? Deportation?
Click to expand...

Canada has lots of room available.
 
good discussion going on here.

maybe life imprisonment for a second time pedophile. why give them a third chance to possibly ruin a third (or more, who knows if there were others who were offended) person's life? the same for a serial rapist or 2-3 time serious, violent offender. society has no place for such scary monsters. unless they're in the military. then maybe.
 
carolinajazz said:
....find it! I'd like to see/read it....and remember, we cannot concern ourselves with verses/passages in the Bible that YOU cannot find!
Click to expand...

Sorry my bad, it was a stubborn kid.

Deuteronomy 21:18-21English Standard Version (ESV)

A Rebellious Son
18 “If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and, though they discipline him, will not listen to them, 19 then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gate of the place where he lives, 20 and they shall say to the elders of his city, ‘This our son is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.’ 21 Then all the men of the city shall stone him to death with stones. So you shall purge the evil from your midst, and all Israel shall hear, and fear.
Click to expand...

Here are some more:

https://www.openbible.info/topics/stoning_to_death
 
Siro said:
Like I responded to LogGrad, your definition is also reasonable. Words don't come with pre-made meanings that we pluck out of the Aether. In the traditional sense, as most people understand it, violence implies the application of force, not mere lack of consent. That's the definition that Stoked invoked in his post, and thus the definition I used in mine.

I also find this definition more useful, since it describes a meaningful distinction, instead of trying to make an ideological point. Rape, in all of its forms, carries an emotional toll. Violence, even without rape, has its own toll. Being violently raped will, for the vast majority of people, be a more traumatizing event than being raped while unconscious. Additionally, it takes different types of people to commit each act. A rapist who's willing to rape a drunk person would not necessarily be willing to use physical violence to accomplish the same thing. A violent rapist, on the other hand, might get off on the violence itself, and not find as much appeal in the former scenario.
Click to expand...
Great post/explanation
 
dalamon said:
Yes. Plus, evidence shows that it's more expensive than life sentencing. Rather open-and-shut, IMO.
Click to expand...

You're missing my point entirely. Let me state first that I am not for the death penalty.

Ending the death penalty won't by itself save any money. That money will just be spent on other cases. That money won't be used to cut budgets and save money.

The crime rate has fallen dramatically in the US but we continue to spend more and more on our criminal justice system. A drop in the crime rate should lead to lower costs, right? Sorry, it doesn't work that way. Justice spending is a political decision.
 
Salt Lake City's newly completed 125 million dollar temple to law and order.
.
dt.common.streams.StreamServer.cls
 
carolinajazz said:
...what in the H-double LL hockey sticks....are your talking about???
Click to expand...

According to Christian mythology, Yahweh (IHVH, Jehovah, God, Allah, whatever name you want to use) impregnated Mary. She was 14. He was as old as the universe. Wouldn't that age difference be a bit problematic?
 
gandalfe said:
According to Christian mythology, Yahweh (IHVH, Jehovah, God, Allah, whatever name you want to use) impregnated Mary. She was 14. He was as old as the universe. Wouldn't that age difference be a bit problematic?
Click to expand...

That depends on what you mean. Are you objecting to her youth, or the age gap? As for the former, it was typical for women to marry and have children soon after they reached puberty. So that would not have been an issue. Today's criteria are based on modern life, and the expectations of a certain level of education and maturity to adequately function in today's society. That did not apply then.

The latter - age gap - is also not relevant, since the problem with the arrangement is incompatibility due to being raised in different atmospheres, and having different values, in addition to a perceived power imbalance due to difference in knowledge and maturity. Neither consideration is relevant because, first, they never cohabited. God simply impregnated her. Second, this would apply to any God-human coupling, since being a 100 is no more substantial than being 14 in comparison to being a 15 billion year old deity.

:D
 
♪alt13 said:
I really don't want to argue on behalf of the death penalty. I simply think that we have a legal system that isn't going to shrink just because we get rid of the DP.
Click to expand...

I don't care either way. Just there's absolutely no reason not to find numbers when there are places that have the death penalty and places that don't. Shouldn't be too hard to research.
 
LogGrad98 said:
Sorry my bad, it was a stubborn kid.
Click to expand...

If an occasion arose where a son became absolutely rebellious and incorrigible after repeated warnings and the necessary discipline, a still sterner measure was taken. The son was brought before the older men of the city, and after testimony from the parents that he was an irreformable offender, the delinquent suffered capital punishment by stoning. Such arrangement evidently had reference to a son beyond the age of what is usually considered a young child, for this one the Scriptures describe as “a glutton and a drunkard.” (De 21:18-21) One striking his father or mother, or calling down evil upon his parents, was put to death. The reason for such strong measures was that the nation might clear away what was bad from their midst and so that “all Israel [would] hear and indeed become afraid.” Therefore, any tendency in the nation toward juvenile delinquency or disrespect of parental authority would be greatly retarded by the punishment inflicted upon such offenders.—Ex 21:15, 17; Mt 15:4; Mr 7:10.

also, this!

Many persons in today’s world feel this is cruel, inhuman treatment. But it should be remembered that there were strict requirements resting first upon the parents to give the child the proper training!


Is this, as some say, an example of extreme cruelty toward children? By no means! Actually, this account clearly shows God’s justice in dealing with those who were incorrigibly wicked and refused to respond to merciful treatment. The “son” in this case was not a young child but was old enough to be a “glutton and a drunkard.” Further, his parents had repeatedly warned him, but he would “not listen to them.” And, very importantly, notice that the son was not put to death until he was brought to trial before “the older men of his city.”
 
carolinajazz said:
If an occasion arose where a son became absolutely rebellious and incorrigible after repeated warnings and the necessary discipline, a still sterner measure was taken. The son was brought before the older men of the city, and after testimony from the parents that he was an irreformable offender, the delinquent suffered capital punishment by stoning. Such arrangement evidently had reference to a son beyond the age of what is usually considered a young child, for this one the Scriptures describe as “a glutton and a drunkard.” (De 21:18-21) One striking his father or mother, or calling down evil upon his parents, was put to death. The reason for such strong measures was that the nation might clear away what was bad from their midst and so that “all Israel [would] hear and indeed become afraid.” Therefore, any tendency in the nation toward juvenile delinquency or disrespect of parental authority would be greatly retarded by the punishment inflicted upon such offenders.—Ex 21:15, 17; Mt 15:4; Mr 7:10.

also, this!

Many persons in today’s world feel this is cruel, inhuman treatment. But it should be remembered that there were strict requirements resting first upon the parents to give the child the proper training!


Is this, as some say, an example of extreme cruelty toward children? By no means! Actually, this account clearly shows God’s justice in dealing with those who were incorrigibly wicked and refused to respond to merciful treatment. The “son” in this case was not a young child but was old enough to be a “glutton and a drunkard.” Further, his parents had repeatedly warned him, but he would “not listen to them.” And, very importantly, notice that the son was not put to death until he was brought to trial before “the older men of his city.”
Click to expand...

Gotcha. Death penalty for underage drinking and backtalking. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.
 
So this has been a decent discussion so far. Here is the monkey wrench for the works:

https://news.yahoo.com/texas-inmate-wants-die-lawyers-try-halt-execution-062635906.html

HUNTSVILLE, Texas (AP) — Texas inmate Daniel Lee Lopez wants to be put to death Wednesday evening for striking and killing a police lieutenant with an SUV during a chase more than six years ago.

Despite his wishes and court rulings that he was competent to make that decision, attorneys for Lopez are taking their fight to halt the punishment to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Lopez's "obvious and severe mental illness" was responsible for his desire to use the legal system for suicide, illustrating his "well-documented history of irrational behavior and suicidal tendencies," attorney David Dow told the high court. Dow also argued the March 2009 crime was not a capital murder because Lopez didn't intend to kill Corpus Christi Lt. Stuart Alexander.

Alexander, 47, was standing in a grassy area on the side of a highway where he had put spike strips when he was struck by the sport utility vehicle Lopez was fleeing in.

"I've accepted my fate," Lopez, 27, said last week from death row. "I'm just ready to move on."

Lopez, who also wrote letters to a federal judge and pleaded for his execution to move forward, said a Supreme Court reprieve would be "disappointing."

Nueces County District Attorney Mark Skurka said Lopez showed "no regard for human life" when he fought with an officer during a traffic stop, then sped away, evading pursuing officers and striking Alexander, who had been on the police force for 20 years. Even when he finally was cornered by police cars, Lopez tried ramming his SUV to escape and didn't stop until he was shot.

"Daniel Lopez is amoral," Skurka said Tuesday. "He had no moral scruples, no nothing. It was always about Daniel Lopez, and it's still about Daniel Lopez.

"He's a bad, bad guy."
Click to expand...

So why not let him die?
 
LogGrad98 said:
So this has been a decent discussion so far. Here is the monkey wrench for the works:

https://news.yahoo.com/texas-inmate-wants-die-lawyers-try-halt-execution-062635906.html



So why not let him die?
Click to expand...

What was the sentence? The article doesn't really say, and I don't see how the state could use capital punishment if that wasn't the sentence. But plenty of folks in prison figure out ways to use a bedsheet or find some other means to kill themselves in prison.


(and this is Texas, after all...)
 
Stoked said:
I am for doctor assisted suicide. Maybe if the individual, their doctor, their lawyer and their shrink sing off on it...?
Click to expand...

Yes, they can all sing "Heigh ho, Heigh ho! It's off to death you go. So keep on singing all day long Heigh ho, Heigh ho, Heigh ho, Heigh ho..."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top