How is the death sentence..

a reply to: Out6of9Balance

Do you think that the murderer that was spared by folks in anceint Jeursalem should of been crucified instead of Jesus. Whom at the time, would identify as an infidel for claiming to be the living god of those folks?

Is there any justice if a murderer given a slap on the wrist, while a rambling mad man, is given harsh capital punishment?

How do you feel about that?

Just a reminder about Eye for an eye

This was not a call to take an eye for an eye, but to limit the punishment to be no MORE than an eye for an eye. This was to curb excessive punishment and revenge taking.

The principle is found in Babylonian Law. If it is surmised that in societies not bound by the rule of law, if a person was hurt, then the injured person (or their relative) would take vengeful retribution on the person who caused the injury. The retribution might be worse than the crime, perhaps even death. Babylonian law put a limit on such actions, restricting the retribution to be no worse than the crime, as long as victim and offender occupied the same status in society.

and later in the article:

In religion. The earliest known use of the principle appears in the Code of Hammurabi, which predates the Hebrew bible. In the Hebrew Law, the "eye for eye" was to restrict compensation to the value of the loss. Thus, it might be better read 'only one eye for one eye'.

a reply to: Out6of9Balance

I've often thought the death sentence is pointless. It doesn't teach the guilty anything ...and it doesn't, won't, cant never has.... deterred further crime.*

*' course, rid the world of the lowlifes...I concur

***ETA: some Arabic co-workers from Yemen say if I went to their country...they'd have to turn on me w stones...and that's just how it is!

a reply to: Specimen88

I wasn't there and time can't be undone.

a reply to: Out6of9Balance

It's not about revenge, or at least it shouldn't be. The death penalty, so far as what I have learned, was more about a deterrant to other would-be criminals.

Obviously that isn't the case as horrible crimes (ie: murder) still occur, regardless of the US state or other country that might impose the death penalty.

But in my view, if you have someone who kills another person or persons through neglect, such as a drunk or high driver, or someone who genuinely makes an honest mistake -- do they need to be killed? If they are truly remorseful (yes, yes, how to do you know - it's another topic) and what they did then killing them does nothing but add more misery to the world.

Now, if you're talking about a serial killer, psychopath, religious zealot/fundamentalist who kills because either they like it, believe in their cause or want to stop democratic society for functioning -- then yes, death penalty. Why? Because they bring nothing to society, they don't help, they don't make it a better place. Especially people determined to see the downfall of modern western civilisation. We don't need them. Get rid of them.

There are numerous differences between murder and the death penalty. Murder is the act of killing a person without justification or excuse. The death penalty is the legal sanction of the punishment of death for people guilty of committing certain crimes.

In the example of infidels, an infidel is a person who does not submit to the will of islam and accept allah as the one true god. Anyone who does not submit is killed for offending allah. That is not sanctioned punishment, that is religious persecution of the highest degree.

a reply to: Vroomfondel

Punishment of death. Fascinating. Totally justified I presume.

a reply to: Out6of9Balance

Your avatar title implying that you are God being God, all the while it is heresy of the most high(infidelity) and is punishable by death just so you know.

a reply to: Specimen88

Oh, ok. I'll keep it in mind.

Remember, when you can't win, take it on the person itself.

a reply to: Out6of9Balance

I try to but I've put in so many dents in the temple floors by prostrating they kicked me out.

May God have mercy on you.

a reply to: noonebutme

Yea, but the point is you do exactly the same to them as they did to others.

a reply to: Out6of9Balance

I didn't see or feel no point other then you rejecting Christs suffering, an projecting yourself as God?

What point did I miss...

Anyways, I can tell your a bit bitter, and more or less just want someone to talk to.

a reply to: Specimen88

I hope you'll manage.

originally posted by: Out6of9Balance
a reply to: Vroomfondel

Punishment of death. Fascinating. Totally justified I presume.

Yes, as a matter of fact, it is.

One is unjustified, the other is not. Justified - as in 'adjudicated in a court of law'.

a reply to: Vroomfondel

By whom? If not by God, by whom?

By the people? But these killers aren't Jesus.

originally posted by: Out6of9Balance
a reply to: hombero

What about disagreeing with a religion of love, or a religion of life (if they exist)

Would that make you a bad person?

'Death to the Infidel' is based purely on religious belief where one person can be judge, jury and executioner. That one person may not even have to prove the dead person was actually an infidel. If they are sincere enough in what they say, then others may believe them without demanding proof.

The Death Sentence is based on enforcement of non-religious laws by a duly appointed law enforcement office, due diligence by investigation, held before a jury of peers and a judge who work together to determine beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did indeed perform a crime worthy of being put to death by a completely different set of law enforcement agents, and the death sentence can be delayed or pardoned by a Governor or the President.

But yeah otherwise they are totally the same thing.

originally posted by: Out6of9Balance
a reply to: Vroomfondel

By whom? If not by God, by whom?

By the people? But these killers aren't Jesus.

You asked how it was different and I explained that. Now it seems you are asserting that only God has the right to punish the guilty.

We are flesh and blood. We live in a world of man made laws meant to govern the behavior of flesh and blood.

We judge the body. God judges the soul.

Lord your ok with a Murrder being alive when he is driving drunk and kills your kid vers a murder who grabs then kills said kid .
You must not be a parent . i raised six boys my nightmares consisted of drunks NOT scycos .

Many many drunks many many MURDERS a year a scyco or two at most odds are its a DRUNK who kills your kid .
So the person gets DRUNK knowing BEING drunk they cant drive and CAN kill some then DO it anyway vers a scyco who just grads random kid on a wim .
FRANKLY there is NO excuse for drunks ONLY reason why people give them a pass is because they them self get DRUNK and Know it could be them doing the killing . KEY WORD know . Its no accident its not a I did not know it could happen its a I know i CAN kill someone wile driving Drunk BUT drive drunk anyway .
Frankly ITS why I DONT drink at all .
Long agaio when I was young I was having a good driving day and ON the ball and was also Putting along going 10 mph in a 15 mph zone . Seeing a group of kids at a cross walk I noticed a young girl who had the I can make it LOOK on her face .
even at ten MPH my bumper was 2 inches from her when I came to a full stop .
I am thank full I was putting around that day and thank full i was on My game driving that day .
If i had hit her it really would have been a accident BUT saying THAT would not bring back that parents dead child .

A GOOD parent Knows the horror of the possibility of losing a child to a DRUNK .

My view drive drunk ONE TIME go to jail a YEAR lose licence 5 years goto class two years .
MY view drunk driving Drive drunk EVEN ONCE kill a kid should be death .
A eye for a eye ? or THE FACT YOU KNOWING drove DRUNK knowing Driving Drunk can KILL someone and as such ARE NOT FIT to be a member of life .
You care about no LIFE not even your own .
Besides with a tap on the hand YOU get now Its v ery very LIKLY MORE likly then If you were just a scyco you WILL kill again .
PSS GET DRUNK have at it AT HOME enjoy I had a GOOD friend who was a alcoholic he got home from work sat In his garage and drank till he passed out darn near every night .
Flat out refused to EVER drive after he opened the first beer .
Good man he would never kill any ones kid He was a responsible drunk

Something I've struggled with for a long time.

Nothing to do with my religious beliefs, scripture or dogmatic creed - I'm agnostic - but everything to do with my personal moral code by which I try to live my life.

If we as a society say it is wrong to kill someone then is it morally wrong and even hypocritical to kill someone for doing so?

But life teaches us that some people are just horrible people with no value or worth and simply shouldn't be allowed the pleasure of life.
Put simply they are just pure evil.

Then there is the FACT that I know if someone murdered or committed some heinous act against any of my loved ones I would do everything possible within my power to either kill them myself or ensure someone did.
That's not bravado or trying to look 'something', its just a fact.

But one innocent person being executed would by far outweigh the deaths of all those who were indeed guilty.

I lean towards imprisoning people guilty of such crimes for the rest of their lives in small cells with straw mattresses, subsistence level food, slopping out, hard labour etc and no interaction with other prisoners.