Personal v Public

-Removed-

Because the punishments listed in Leviticus and other legal statutes are the maximum penalties for crimes, not the absolute proscribed punishments that must be carried out in every instance.

@bigdoggproblem said
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
Point #1 I consider to be the strongest argument against capital punishment. Nevertheless, I feel the occurrences of this are rare, and the safeguards built into the system adequate to give the accused a chance, even if sometimes they fail.

Also, I consider the gain of sparing an innocent man's life to be smaller than it first appears, since he'll ...[text shortened]... manity is ever diminished is Utopian, and impractical. It's a dirty job, but someone needs to do it.

I think I can scupper your first point if I personalise the scenario. What if that innocent man was a relative of yours? Is the gain of sparing them being executed a small thing? Wouldn't you rather they went to prison and you were given the opportunity to try and vindicate them? (They are innocent after all). The argument that we simply accept a rare few of innocent people will be executed and that this is better anyway than them going to prison for the rest of their life doesn't hold much water with me.

By 'diminishing our humanity' I mean setting us back as a species, returning us to the OT world of an eye for an eye and stoning people willy-nilly. (So happy to find an application for that word). My nan use to say "don't hit your sister" and then proceed to hit me on the back of the wrist. - If we are to value life and further evolve as a species then we have to transcend vengeance and executions and view 'all' killing as anathema. "Don't kill them or we'll kill you" puts us all in the same primitive bag.

And I don't think it Utopian to explore other options to capital punishment. We do pretty well without it in the UK.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
I think I can scupper your first point if I personalise the scenario. What if that innocent man was a relative of yours? Is the gain of sparing them being executed a small thing? Wouldn't you rather they went to prison and you were given the opportunity to try and vindicate them? (They are innocent after all). The argument that we simply accept a rare few of innocent ...[text shortened]... k it Utopian to explore other options to capital punishment. We do pretty well without it in the UK.

So you're saying it's your Nan's fault you hit your sister. Go to your room.

(I missed the point, but I didn't care as nobody could hang me for it. That would have made me think twice.)

@ghost-of-a-duke said
I think I can scupper your first point if I personalise the scenario. What if that innocent man was a relative of yours? Is the gain of sparing them being executed a small thing? Wouldn't you rather they went to prison and you were given the opportunity to try and vindicate them? (They are innocent after all). The argument that we simply accept a rare few of innocent ...[text shortened]... k it Utopian to explore other options to capital punishment. We do pretty well without it in the UK.

RE: paragraph 1
Depends on the relative. Some of my relatives would probably rather die than live the rest of their life in prison. As far as clearing their name myself, I am sorry to disappoint, but I'm not much of a detective.

(I note that you misstated my argument; I never claimed that execution was better than imprisonment.)
-----

RE: paragraph 2
Didn't you say earlier that you would kill to save the life of another? If we must regard all killing as anathema, then we do not have the option of preventative killing.

I've always wondered how a parent is supposed to refrain from any form of physical punishment with a child that is intent on hitting. You put them in 'time out', but they will not stay there. Then what? Let's say they run back over and punch their sister again. What are you going to do? Put them in an even longer 'time out'?

Maybe it will end up with the 'civilized' solution of building a little prison cell in the house and locking them in there.

I think I'd rather take the slap on the wrist.
-----

RE: Final paragraph
I also don't think it is Utopian to explore alternatives to capital punishment. I would have thought that clear from what I said earlier. Again, my argument is getting misstated.

We do pretty well without it in the UK.

Here is a woman, just released from a British prison that deserves a bullet in her head instead of freedom.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/13325824/child-killer-mairead-philpott-freed-early/amp/&ved=2ahUKEwips_vXx6btAhVKTTABHWlwDMEQFjAUegQIDhAB&usg=AOvVaw1BIWu0A1Jxjsypg2csPd3r&ampcf=1

@bigdoggproblem said
RE: paragraph 1
Depends on the relative. Some of my relatives would probably rather die than live the rest of their life in prison. As far as clearing their name myself, I am sorry to disappoint, but I'm not much of a detective.

(I note that you misstated my argument; I never claimed that execution was better than imprisonment.)
-----

RE: paragraph 2
Di ...[text shortened]... . I would have thought that clear from what I said earlier. Again, my argument is getting misstated.

I paraphrased sir, and did so fairly I think. You stated, "I consider the gain of sparing an innocent man's life to be smaller than it first appears, since he'll likely serve life in prison anyway [which is not much of a life;..."

How is that not akin to saying execution was better than imprisonment? (Even if innocent).

In regards to my previous statement of killing to protect another from being killed, this is not the same as executing someone already taken out of society where other options (like imprisonment) are available.

Millions of parents around the world manage to raise well adjusted human beings without ever feeling the need to use physical chastisement. Smacking is the easy option. Clever parenting provides many others.

@relentless-red said
So you're saying it's your Nan's fault you hit your sister. Go to your room.

(I missed the point, but I didn't care as nobody could hang me for it. That would have made me think twice.)

The world has in the last few decades, gone down a dangerous road of sympathizing with the perpetrators of these horrific crimes. In fact in many cases they become famous, are celebrities, they are wrongfully pardoned and released, they write books and become rich. Many go back to their evil ways and continue to terrorize the innocent.

-Removed-

Yes to that punishment for serial killers, cold blooded murderers, rapists, pedophiles, those who abduct people for organs. These are the scum that need to be sent immediately to meet their maker.

-Removed-

Are you questioning God's sovereignty?

Under the law David should have been stoned to death for both adultery and murder.

God forgave David. There's a lesson to be learned from it. It's a complex study.

David also slaughtered many men, women and children.

The world is brutal. And getting worse.

@secondson said
The world is brutal. And getting worse.

Would support women who have abortions being executed? Or would you support prison sentences?

@fmf said
Would support women who have abortions being executed? Or would you support prison sentences?

I "support" people learning the difference between right and wrong.

Abortion is wrong, it is murder. Abortion should be illegal.

Maybe the question you should ask is, if abortion was made illegal as the law of the land, and determined to be an act of homicide, what would you think the penalty should be?

The answer is simple: murder is a sin. The penalty for sin is death.

Brutal isn't it? The human race is under a death penalty. We're all going to die because of sin.

It's a no-brainer FMF. Yours is not the solution. You ain't God, so you can't say how it's to be. Unless of course you agree with God!

@secondson said
The answer is simple: murder is a sin. The penalty for sin is death.

I understand your stance on abortion. So, just to be clear: you believe the penalty for "sin" should be a death sentence? You would support politicians who promised to enact laws to that effect?