Why is it that here in America, so many so-called "christians" are pro-death penalty?

You would think that for a group of people to support the death penalty of a religous sect whose very foundation involves the wrongful execution of a wrongly accused "man" the desire to repeat that offense would be non-existant.

Seriously, I've tried to figure out this hypocrisy for years and it just makes no sense - Jesus Christ was wrongly executed, and there have been countless other wrongly executed prisoners over the centuries, so why continue to push this bloodlust?

Are you assuming everyone for the death penalty is a Christian? Careful with those assumptions.

ETA I am against it. There are laws and punishments set forth that God tolerates. If a nation has the Death penalty its Gods will for it to exist. I dont think I could sit in a jury and pass judgement like that. Then again I cannot say for certain. If one of my children were murdered I would probably have less of a problem objecting to it but maby after much prayer I would be able to forgive.

The law is there for a reason and if the law states that some crimes are punishable by death, then who am I to change it? I cannot. I would rather see 50 guilty go free than to see one innocent die. I cannot imagine a more horrible position than to be inprisoned for a crime one did not commit. I actually would prefer the death penalty to life in prison where your whole family thinks of you as a murderer and write you off completely. Death would be much more humane if that were the case.

I am glad we have better methods for proving guilt or innocence. Unfortunately it wont stop the chances of innocents getting put away, but it is improving that chances for the innocent to make it.

BTW whats with the hypocrisy of some non christians always questioning the faith and ethics of others when they usually accuse Christians of doing the same to the non religious? Then again I never saw the need to pick out a group based on faith or culture and question their beliefs and think that I am right and they are wrong. It just does not seem like a good way to get people to open up.

I support the death penalty for those guilty of extreme crimes such as murder, repeat rape offenders, or other similar types.  When it is proven that someone is guilty of these crimes, that person should receive the penalty of death.  That person has forfeited their right to live.

I also believe that it should be the result of a fair judicial system, and not vigilante justice.  It is about holding the person responsible for their actions.

Edited to add:  It isn't about bloodlust.  

You would think that for a group of people to support the death penalty of a religous sect whose very foundation involves the wrongful execution of a wrongly accused "man" the desire to repeat that offense would be non-existant. Seriously, I've tried to figure out this hypocrisy for years and it just makes no sense - Jesus Christ was wrongly executed, and there have been countless other wrongly executed prisoners over the centuries, so why continue to push this bloodlust?

Your statement above makes it sound like everyone on death row is innocent.  That is simply not true.  

Speaking of bloodlust, try stacking up all the dead killed by the murderers on death row against the number of innocents that have been executed by mistake.  How big do you really think those piles are?  The most rudimentary analysis will conclude that one of those piles is hundreds of times larger than the other.  

Which pile would you rather be responsible for?  Make no mistake - we will be held accountable for wrongful death that we could have prevented with lawful justice.  

Quoted: I would rather see 50 guilty go free than to see one innocent die.

Pro Death Penalty statement:

"If we execute murderers and there is in fact no deterrent effect, we have killed a bunch of murderers. If we fail to execute murderers, and doing so would in fact have deterred other murders, we have allowed the killing of a bunch of innocent victims. I would much rather risk the former. This, to me, is not a tough call."
~~John McAdams - Marquette University/Department of Political Science, on deterrence


This statement focuses on the impact of violent crime on the victims, asserting that the death penalty is one means of preventing further crimes from taking place.

Anti Death Penalty statement:

Capital punishment is the ultimate denial of civil liberties. The death penalty today is unfair and unjustifiable

This statement focuses on the potential innocence of the convicted death row inmate, arguing that if any innocent people are executed, it is evidence that the system is broken and must be halted to prevent further death to innocent people.  

grommet's comparison of the two opposing viewpoints:

The primary goal of both groups is to prevent the death of innocent people.  This is surely a noble goal, and any reasonable person would conclude that it is a good thing to avoid death to innocent people.

What it appears to come down to is numbers.  The Justice for All folks claim that for every violent criminal executed, somewhere between 5 and 28 other innocent people are saved from being murdered (depending on which study you follow).  The ACLU claims that 1 innocent person executed is too many.  So let’s do some math:

Per the ACLU, some 112 persons have been exonerated and released from death row since 1973.  These people were not actually executed; they were released.  The actual number of persons executed who were later found to be innocent is not known.  Let’s just stick with the 112 for now.

Between 1973 and 2000, some 6930 people were sentenced to die in the US.  This means that somewhere between 34,650 and 194,040 innocent citizens were actually saved from being murdered.  

Now, given that the system is not perfect, which number would you rather have to answer for?   112…or... 34000?

My conclusion is that anyone who can reasonably say that they are more concerned with the wrongful death of something less than 112 people than with the wrongful death of 34000 people is suffering from a mental disorder of a familiar note… the complete inability to empathize with the actual living and breathing victims of crime, and the willingness to bury them under the pedestal upon which they place that noble savage, the criminal.

So just how many innocent victims are you willing to answer for?  

By the way, the death of Jesus was not accidental, or a mistake.  He knew it would happen before the world was created.  He voluntarily came to earth for that purpose.  

John 18:37:

[37] Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.

He allowed this to happen so that he could bring salvation from sin and death to the world.  

How much more blood would be on our hands as a society if those 6900 killers were still out there practicing their trade?  Take a closer look at the victims of violent crimes.  Get to know them.  Try to feel their pain before you shed a tear for their killers.

-grommet

Quoted: Why is it that here in America, so many so-called "christians" are pro-death penalty? You would think that for a group of people to support the death penalty of a religous sect whose very foundation involves the wrongful execution of a wrongly accused "man" the desire to repeat that offense would be non-existant. Seriously, I've tried to figure out this hypocrisy for years and it just makes no sense - Jesus Christ was wrongly executed, and there have been countless other wrongly executed prisoners over the centuries, so why continue to push this bloodlust?

Obviously Christians don't desire the execution of the innocent.

But you must remember that it was God Himself that instituted the death penalty, and there is nothing in the Bible that says there should be no death penalty. In fact, the Bible says in the New Testament that God gave governments the power of the sword to punish evil doers:

"3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. 4 For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil."

Romans 13

There are some offenders whose continued existence poses a very real threat to society at large. Those people should be executed. There are some whose offenses against humanity are so severe that justice demands their blood. Those people should be executed.

Christians don't support the execution of innocent men, which is why our system of justice gives so many opportunities for condemned men.

I would have no problem reccomending the death sentence of someone I knew beyond a reasonable doubt was guilty of the crime of murder. If I had doubts, I would never reccomend such a sentence.

I've always supported the death penalty but I think I could settle for life in prison without parole as an alternative.  None of that so-called life in prison that really isn't.  The death penalty as a deterrent is not really true from what I've read, and it also tends to cost the state more money because they have to pay for representation on appeals.  Then there is always the possibility of mistakes once in a while.

Quoted: ... The death penalty as a deterrent is not really true from what I've read, and it also tends to cost the state more money because they have to pay for representation on appeals...

The same appeals process that renders it expensive (as you note) is also what renders it ineffective as a deterrent.  Most theories of CJ recognize that for any punishment to have a deterrent effect it must be (1) swift, (2) certain, and (3) appropriately severe to the crime in question.  There is no question as to CPs severity, of course, but the modern appeals process ensures that it is neither swift nor certain and reduces or eliminates any deterrent effect it might have.

The CP proponent will counter that it "deters" that particular offender from committing any more crimes, but that is not really "deterrence" in the traditional sense.

If deterrence is the only justification/defense for CP (and I am not saying that it is), then that argument fails IMHO.

I would only support the death penalty if we televised the executions in prime time . . .

But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. Matthew 18:6

What? No hope for repentance? No 'second chance'?

Apparently not.

Some souls evidence such wanton depravity that even the Love of God avails them nothing.

We value innocent lives so dearly, that we may reasonably demand that guilty lives be sacrificed to present a deterrent, a punishment, or a retribution to their crimes.

Eric The(Hardliner)Hun

Genisis 9:6 Whoever sheds man's blood,
        By man his blood shall be shed,
        For in the image of God
        He made man.

Why do Christians (broad term...I am a born again) support the death penalty?  God created man in His image.  There is something about killing a person that everyone knows is wrong and is a significant thing to do.  NOBODY on this earth that ever lived thought lightly of it, I dont care who you are.  Yes, you can suppress your conscience and convictions- but EVERYONE knows that it is not an insignificant thing to kill a person.

Everyone KNOWS that it is wrong, but why?  We kill animals for food and we do not think twice about it, but why a human.  Because man was created in the image of God ( a will, emotion, humor, intellect, ect.) it seems EVERYONE has a sense (or at one time had a sense) that there is something wrong with it.

And so, God instituted the death penalty to support the notion that it is significant when someone kills another.

Innocence v. Guilt.  A 'guilty' life is not quite so precious.

Old Jewish law was right on so many things.  No loans/debts.  7-year Jubilee pretty much assured that no one could fall into multiyear/lifetime debt at the hands of another.  Executing child molesters & their victims seems pretty harsh until you've actually worked around them & seen the type of monster they both becmoe.  Some molesters are born.  Others are made.  I kid you not.

The accurate translation of the specific term in the Biblical reference is 'murder', which is distinct from the term 'kill', as some have erroneously argued.  "Thought shalt not commit murder" refers to the taking of an innocent life.  Taking a guilty life, whether by execution of self-defense, are entirely distinct from 'murder'.

Plese note that the Jewish system was most merciful on the innocent and punished the guilty. Quite unlike today's system.

The Jewish system had no prisons. The innocent were not forced to pay for the housing, medical, dental, cable, internet, and 3 squares a day for the guilty.

Also the guilty were not rewarded for thier crimes by getting free housing, medical, dental, cable, internet, and 3 squares a day. In fact, it was the guilty who responsible for payment by either being sold into slavery, paying restitution, or stop consuming oxygen.

Imagine the economic benifits of this common sense approach.

Quoted: Why is it that here in America, so many so-called "christians"  are pro-death penalty?

The sooner we execute the crooks, the sooner they get to hell.

Quoted: Innocence v. Guilt.  A 'guilty' life is not quite so precious. Old Jewish law was right on so many things.  No loans/debts.  7-year Jubilee pretty much assured that no one could fall into multiyear/lifetime debt at the hands of another.  Executing child molesters & their victims seems pretty harsh until you've actually worked around them & seen the type of monster they both becmoe.  Some molesters are born.  Others are made.  I kid you not. The accurate translation of the specific term in the Biblical reference is 'murder', which is distinct from the term 'kill', as some have erroneously argued.  "Thought shalt not commit murder" refers to the taking of an innocent life.  Taking a guilty life, whether by execution of self-defense, are entirely distinct from 'murder'.

So according to that my fiance should kill her daughter because she was a victim of a child molester. Are you saying it would not be murder?

Quoted: What happened to "Thou shall not kill" and all sins can be forgiven?

All sins can be forgiven, BUT there is still conseqenses to ones actions.

The two thieves on calvery, both were guilty, sentenced to death, one was forgiven, he asked to be, the other was not, he did not ask for it, BUT BOTH still died on a cross.

its not a sin to execute those who have committed a crime worthy of death.

Lebrew

Quoted: What happened to "Thou shall not kill" and all sins can be forgiven?

Thou shalt not MURDER is a better rendering of the original Hebrew text.

And even Jesus says that not all sins can be forgiven.....

Quoted: And even Jesus says that not all sins can be forgiven.....

Would that be this?:

Mt 12:31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.
:32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.


In worldly terms that's like saying all disease can be cured but the disease of not being willing to see the doctor cannot be cured. In other words, all sin can be forgiven IF the person is willing to turn to God's spirit for forgiveness. Without God's spirit sin can't be forgiven.

That seems like a pretty shaky justification for capital punishment.

Quoted: In worldly terms that's like saying all disease can be cured but the disease of not being willing to see the doctor cannot be cured. In other words, all sin can be forgiven IF the person is willing to turn to God's spirit for forgiveness. Without God's spirit sin can't be forgiven. That seems like a pretty shaky justification for capital punishment.

I was pointing out two specific unarguable facts:

1. The better translation of "kill" is murder.
2. Even Jesus said that not ALL sins are forgivable

Thus demonstrating gunrunner's two main points to be factually incorrect.

I was not attempting to use Jesus' teachings on the unforgivable sin to be a justification of capital punishment. Merely using Jesus' teachings on the unforgivable sin to demonstrate that Gunrunner's ideas about Christian teachings were incomplete.

Quoted: I was pointing out two specific unarguable facts: 1. The better translation of "kill" is murder. 2. Even Jesus said that not ALL sins are forgivable Thus demonstrating gunrunner's two main points to be factually incorrect. I was not attempting to use Jesus' teachings on the unforgivable sin to be a justification of capital punishment. Merely using Jesus' teachings on the unforgivable sin to demonstrate that Gunrunner's ideas about Christian teachings were incomplete.

OK, but I hope we agree that when Jesus said there was a (as in one) sin that couldn't be forgiven he was not talking about murder, rape, kidnapping or anything else that we might impose the capital punishment for.

FWIW, there doesn't seem to be any indications in the new testament that Jesus or his followers thought the imposition of the death penalty was wrong or immoral. It just seems like a matter of fact that it happened (to Steven, attempts on Paul, to the two theives and to Jesus). In the case of the woman caught in the act of adultery, Jesus didn't condemn the death penalty per se. He simply held to the letter of the Law which required the GUILTLESS to impose the sentence. On the other hand, he was guiltless and could have carried out the sentence but he chose to forgive.

BTW, there were a lot of things punishable by death under the old testament. Besides adultery, blasphemy, homosexuality and even disobedience to one's parents were occasions for stonings. I assume that most folks who lean on the example of the Moses Law would not support those sentences today.

Quoted: Quoted: I was pointing out two specific unarguable facts: 1. The better translation of "kill" is murder. 2. Even Jesus said that not ALL sins are forgivable Thus demonstrating gunrunner's two main points to be factually incorrect. I was not attempting to use Jesus' teachings on the unforgivable sin to be a justification of capital punishment. Merely using Jesus' teachings on the unforgivable sin to demonstrate that Gunrunner's ideas about Christian teachings were incomplete. OK, but I hope we agree that when Jesus said there was a (as in one) sin that couldn't be forgiven he was not talking about murder, rape, kidnapping or anything else that we might impose the capital punishment for. FWIW, there doesn't seem to be any indications in the new testament that Jesus or his followers thought the imposition of the death penalty was wrong or immoral. It just seems like a matter of fact that it happened (to Steven, attempts on Paul, to the two theives and to Jesus). In the case of the woman caught in the act of adultery, Jesus didn't condemn the death penalty per se. He simply held to the letter of the Law which required the GUILTLESS to impose the sentence. On the other hand, he was guiltless and could have carried out the sentence but he chose to forgive. BTW, there were a lot of things punishable by death under the old testament. Besides adultery, blasphemy, homosexuality and even disobedience to one's parents were occasions for stonings. I assume that most folks who lean on the example of the Moses Law would not support those sentences today.

Please remember that those punishments were administered under a theocracy...or rather...the theocracy of that time.  We are not living in a theocracy today, and it is up to the government to carry out the laws which have been made.  Render unto ceasar that which is ceasar's...including the ability to administer capital punishment.

God doesn't have a problem with the death penalty...go ask a Phillistine.


The Ted Bundy's and Robert Glen Coe's of this world got off pretty easy....too bad "jawbone of an ass" wasn't an option.

Quoted: Please remember that those punishments were administered under a theocracy...or rather...the theocracy of that time.  We are not living in a theocracy today, and it is up to the government to carry out the laws which have been made.  Render unto ceasar that which is ceasar's...including the ability to administer capital punishment.

Yep.

Quoted: Why is it that here in America, so many so-called "christians" are pro-death penalty? You would think that for a group of people to support the death penalty of a religous sect whose very foundation involves the wrongful execution of a wrongly accused "man" the desire to repeat that offense would be non-existant. Seriously, I've tried to figure out this hypocrisy for years and it just makes no sense - Jesus Christ was wrongly executed, and there have been countless other wrongly executed prisoners over the centuries, so why continue to push this bloodlust?

Ever read Acts Chapter 5?  Ananias and Sapphira lied to God and lost their lives for it, and that was in the early days of the Christian Church, after Christ.

I agree that some have been wrongfully executed, but many have been rightfully executed.  Yes, Christ was killed because people plotted against him and sought a reason to kill him, but the whole idea of Christianity isn't centered on making sure that good people aren't wrongfully executed.  If it was, Christ wouldn't have been murdered, Peter wouldn't have been murdered, Stephen wouldn't have been murdered, and the list goes on and on.  Christianity is about doing what's right with the time you are alotted on this earth- which is what Jesus Christ did.  If you choose to do evil, there is no guarantee that you won't forfeit your right to live.  On the other hand, Christ Himself is proof that even the most innocent can be taken from us in a horrible way.

Quoted: Ever read Acts Chapter 5?  Ananias and Sapphira lied to God and lost their lives for it, and that was in the early days of the Christian Church, after Christ.

Well, technically, they weren't executed. At least not by man, anyway . . .

Just because you can be forgiven of your sins does not mean you have the right to escape the consequences of that sin.

I am a christian and personally I think the world would be better off if more criminals were executed.  

Quoted: Just because you can be forgiven of your sins does not mean you have the right to escape the consequences of that sin.

Oh, I agree that in a civil society, punishment for crimes is in order. I have mixed feelings about the death penalty but they're largely rooted in the costs involved and the racial and social disparity by which the sentence has been handed out in the past. Rarely do people of means receive the death penalty. Poor people and minorities receive it disproportionately, largely because they rely on public defenders. If we provided better legal counsel to indigent defendants I might feel better about society's use of the death penalty. I also have concerns about society executing innocent people and I seriously question whether the death penalty is much of a deterrant.

As for the moral component, I'm pretty sure God's the final judge and he'll sort it all out in the end. I'm quite sure people have been executed that were largely "right" with God in their hearts and, in some cases, valuable witnesses for God's side have been taken out of service prematurely. In other cases, I'm sure people have lingered in prison for years who were "dead" in their mind and heart the whole while. Likewise, I suspect many a "religious" person has worked hatred and spiritual murder toward their fellow man in their belief that the death penalty should be carried out while other "religious" people have been judgemental and hateful of their fellow man in their effort to oppose the dealth penalty.

The morality of the question cuts in a lot of different directions depending on what's going on in people's minds. Again, I'll leave that to God to sort out. If society chooses to impose the death penalty or not impose it, the decision should not be made on the strength of one religion over another but rather a rational examination of facts and weighing the protections and violations of individual rights.

I am a christian and personally I think the world would be better off if more criminals were executed.

I don't know. The world might be better off if people were more merciful and forgiving. I'm not trying to be flippant or say you're wrong. It's just a way of looking at another side of the same coin.

Quoted: But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. Matthew 18:6 <snip> Eric The(Hardliner)Hun

You beat me to it!!!!

WHOEVER says that the VICTIM should be killed with the molester is an insane abomination. I had hoped that we had evolved spiritually and socially PAST the "Blame the Victim" syndrome. ANYone who has seen the suffering and the WORK molestation victims go thru to live beyond their victimhood could not make such an asinine statement.
If your "god" insists upon punishing the victims, then to HELL with IT.
GOD is love and compassion. LOVE does not punish the innocent. Oh, except in tribal cultures in the Middle East... Reminds me of the lady in a burka who was raped... then murdered by her KIN for disgracing them by being raped. They must have no natural love for their children over there.
As the OT Prophet Micah said  "What doth Jehovah require of thee? To do justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your GOD".

Quoted: But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. Matthew 18:6 What? No hope for repentance? No 'second chance'? Apparently not. Some souls evidence such wanton depravity that even the Love of God avails them nothing. We value innocent lives so dearly, that we may reasonably demand that guilty lives be sacrificed to present a deterrent, a punishment, or a retribution to their crimes. Eric The(Hardliner)Hun

That's exactly what I believe.
Deterence is always limited by the attitude of the offenders. Most think they won't get caught, while others simply don't care.
 That's why it's called capital punishment.

Genesis 9:6  Whoever sheds man's blood,  By man his blood shall be shed


Now I think you have to be discerning  Killing, Manslaughter and Murder are not the same

The Liberals in this Country have so distorted the Justice System that they refuse to put to death the most Heinous criminals ( Guilty )

They have no problem whatsoever sanctioning the Death of Babies inside a womb ( Innocent )

The Old Testament also specified the death penalty for:

• allowing your livestock to get out if a death results (Exo 21:28-29)
• cursing your father or mother (Exo 21:17)
• rebellious sons (Deu 21:18-21)
• working on the Sabbath (Exo 31:14)
• preaching false doctrine (Deu 18:20 Deu 13:5)
• blasphemy (Lev. 24:16)
• adultery (Lev 20:10)
• homosexuality (Lev 20:13)
• beastiality (Lev. 20:15)
• falsely claiming to be a virgin prior to marriage (Deu 22:20-21)

Should we enforce these as well? If not, why to we turn to the Old Testament for justificaton for some capital crimes but not for others?

And the hyprocracy surprises you?  Why?  Remember, hyprocracy is the cornerstone of most (if not all) religions, usually in the form of "its OK if WE do this, but you non-believers better not".


So-called "biblical law", if you believe it to be valid, allowed for death as a punishment.  

Quoted: And the hyprocracy surprises you?  Why?  Remember, hyprocracy is the cornerstone of most (if not all) religions, usually in the form of "its OK if WE do this, but you non-believers better not".

I think you need to read the rules of the religion forum again.

Quoted: And the hyprocracy surprises you?  Why?  Remember, hyprocracy is the cornerstone of most (if not all) religions, usually in the form of "its OK if WE do this, but you non-believers better not". So-called "biblical law", if you believe it to be valid, allowed for death as a punishment.

I don't see it as a case of hypocracy but rather selective justification of actions. People want to exact revenge for certain crimes and take solice in the use of the death penalty because it was condoned in the Old Testament. My refering to other old testament death penalties was just a way of pointing out the inconsistancy.

As for Bible Law, the OT scriptures do specify the death penalty for rape and murder in addition to the violations of the Law that I mentioned. But the question has to do with CHRISTIANS and the death penalty. On one occasion where Jesus was asked about the application of the death penalty (the woman caught in the act of adultery), he didn't say the death penalty was wrong. He said that the person without sin should cast the first stone. This is a RIGHTEOUS judgement on his part. And yet, he was without sin. He could have cast a stone. But he didn't. That, to me, seems like the guiding example for Christians.

As for hypocracy, I don't see any case here where anyone is being hypocritical. It's not like religious people are saying THEY can impose the death penalty but others can't. That would be case of not following the standard you set for others. But I don't see that anyone has proposed anything like that.

The purpose of the death penalty is not a deterrent.  It is a PENALTY, it is the punishment for the crime.  I wish people would quit putting more into it than it really is.  If it deters someone from commiting a capital offense that is a bonus.  Criminals don't care about deterrents.  If deterrents worked no one would commit crimes for the simple fact that going to jail should be a deterrent.  I have arrested many people who have been arrested before.  Having been in jail didn't deter them from commiting more crime after being released.  Look at the records of those on death row.  How many of them have never been arrested before and then just wound up commiting a crime that they got the death PENALTY for?

IMHO we are just sending those sentenced to death on to the next higher court.  All the facts and evidence are there for judgement.  DNA, Fingerprints, and bloody gloves are not required there.

Our court system does everything it can to not put the innocent to death.  It is sad should it happen, but a risk that I sleep well with.

As a Christian, I am pro "victim's" rights.  

I believe those worthy of the death penalty have lost their rights by destroying the lives of others.  Never forget who the true victim is.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: And the hyprocracy surprises you?  Why?  Remember, hyprocracy is the cornerstone of most (if not all) religions, usually in the form of "its OK if WE do this, but you non-believers better not". I think you need to read the rules of the religion forum again. +1

1) The rules in here are purposefully vauge, so that VA-gunnut can enforce what he feels like, when he feels like it, and without having to back it up with reasons.  This has been demonstrated time and again, with calls for clarification resulting in temporary banning rather than answering questions.
2) I fully understand the proper term for this forum is "Christian forum" -- all others are barely tolerated, and not really welcome.
3) That statement did not bash ANY religion.  It simply pointed out a fact, that most, if not all, religions are full of hypocracy.
4)  You got a problem with me, IM me.  Don't bring crap up in here.

And you conveniently left out the 2nd part of my post, where I did say that "biblical law" if you believe it valid, allowed for death as a punishment.

For those that need it spelled out:  Most christians do not have a problem with the majority of "biblical law" (aside from the "slavery is ok" bit, which at least most of humanity has grown beyond) -- therefore they see the death penalty as something that is OK under certain circumstances.

Quoted: 1) The rules in here are purposefully vauge, so that VA-gunnut can enforce what he feels like, when he feels like it, and without having to back it up with reasons.  This has been demonstrated time and again, with calls for clarification resulting in temporary banning rather than answering questions.

Well if you believe such is the case, why post here? If you believe this area of the site is "hostile" to your viewpoint and unfairly rigged, then why on earth trouble yourself with it?

2) I fully understand the proper term for this forum is "Christian forum" -- all others are barely tolerated, and not really welcome.

You are incorrect.

Other ideas and beliefs CAN be expressed here.....In a respectful way.

I can have a legitimate debate about a theological point with someone else without mocking their beliefs as I have several times in the past, a skill which you apparently have yet to develop.

3) That statement did not bash ANY religion.  It simply pointed out a fact, that most, if not all, religions are full of hypocracy.

Your "fact" isn't really a genuine fact. It is a fact only within the confines of your own skull.

4)  You got a problem with me, IM me.  Don't bring crap up in here.

Pardon me, but weren't YOU the one who made the silly comment that you JUST repeated? Weren't YOU the one who couldn't participate in this discussion without being condescending and puerile? And somehow I am the one that needs to modify my behavior?

If I catch you saying such silly things, I will challenge you on them just as I do just about everyone else I catch saying such silly things. If you had said them in private, I would have responded in private. But as you saw fit to do so in public, I responded in public.  If that upsets you, then the simple solution is to stop saying silly things in public if you don't want someone coming along and publicly correcting you.

And you conveniently left out the 2nd part of my post, where I did say that "biblical law" if you believe it valid, allowed for death as a punishment. For those that need it spelled out:  Most christians do not have a problem with the majority of "biblical law" (aside from the "slavery is ok" bit, which at least most of humanity has grown beyond) -- therefore they see the death penalty as something that is OK under certain circumstances.

Well whoop-tee-doo! After calling Christianity a system of hypocracy, you decide to tell everybody what justification Christians like myself have for a death penalty.......And somehow I am supposed to forget the first comment??

Goodness.

I believe in the salvation of Christ.

I do not believe that people like Ted Bundy, Charles Starkweather, Son of Sam, Tim McVeigh et all need to share this planet with the rest of us.

Conflict? Maybe.

To me, both simply make sense.

I'm a Christian and for the death penalty.

Is there another way to handle this guy?

What Hausy said. +1 It's not a deterent. It's the guarantee that they won't do it again.

It would be interesting to see how many would be for life sentences if they got taxed that way and Capital punshishment swaying persons got taxed their way. If we could still do hanging and bury them standing we could do it pretty cost effective.

Who keeps the fox alive after he has killed all your chickens?

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: And the hyprocracy surprises you?  Why?  Remember, hyprocracy is the cornerstone of most (if not all) religions, usually in the form of "its OK if WE do this, but you non-believers better not". I think you need to read the rules of the religion forum again. +1 1) The rules in here are purposefully vauge, so that VA-gunnut can enforce what he feels like, when he feels like it, and without having to back it up with reasons.  This has been demonstrated time and again, with calls for clarification resulting in temporary banning rather than answering questions. 2) I fully understand the proper term for this forum is "Christian forum" -- all others are barely tolerated, and not really welcome. 3) That statement did not bash ANY religion.  It simply pointed out a fact, that most, if not all, religions are full of hypocracy. 4)  You got a problem with me, IM me.  Don't bring crap up in here. And you conveniently left out the 2nd part of my post, where I did say that "biblical law" if you believe it valid, allowed for death as a punishment. For those that need it spelled out:  Most christians do not have a problem with the majority of "biblical law" (aside from the "slavery is ok" bit, which at least most of humanity has grown beyond) -- therefore they see the death penalty as something that is OK under certain circumstances. Come on now! We've been through this before. I'm pretty sure you know what goes and doesn't in this forum. If you really believe the rules are so vauge, then it's just better to take a more cautious approach when posting in here. The topic was "Christians and the Death Penalty", not "Why are all Religions BS". Please just stay on topic, and we won't have a problem.

YOU INTENTIONALLY IGNORE THE FACT THAT MY POST WAS ON TOPIC -- IT ADDRESS BOTH THE APPEARANCE OF HYPOCRACY, AND THE FACT THAT SO-CALLED "BIBLICAL-LAW" ALLOWED FOR THE DEATH PENALTY.

And again, you dodge the issue of the "rules" by saying "you know".  Spell 'em out, it'll make your job easier.  But that's another topic, and in the interests of above, that's the last I will say on it.

Well, classically we have to recall that the whole concept of a jaol or jail was essentially a temporary holding pen till trial when the accused was either freed or executed. There were many penalties short of death:

You could be exiled, sent off to work in the salt mines (sort of hard labor with the wink wink wink thought that if you survived the mines you deserve your freedom), or sold into slavery for an indeterminate amount of time.

But there were relatively few dungeons or PRISONS in the classic world since it cost alot to keep someone fed and sheltered for a long time. They were practical folk...they'd much rather get some salt mining or slave labor out of a man than just lock him up for years on end.

Secondly, it was determined that given the small size of community life and the inter-connected ness of people to clan and tribe, killing an unjust aggressor was often seen as the ONLY practical way to keep him from mischief or being liberated by his buddies to continue his rapine and murder.

With the rise of modern day penal systems where it is possible to lock someone up for life, the Church is now preaching that this is advisable for hard criminals rather than execution since they're not getting out and thus no longer are a threat to society.

But the Church hasn't nullified 2000 years of tradition or the principle that - at least theoretically a society does still have the right to self defense against an unjust aggressor and that hence there might be occasions when execution is the only alternative to letting a guy go.

For example, suppose you catch Osama in some corner of the globe. he's in custody but your convoy is attacked and it looks likely that he'll be liberated. Excuting him on the spot rather than risk his rescue might serve justice so long as the one making the call is authorized to do so.

Jesus wasn't wrongly executed   " Yet It pleased the Lord to crush Him "  Isaiah 53

Genesis 9:6 " Whoever sheds man's blood, By man his blood shall be shed "

The Guilty ( Murderers ) should be punished
The Innocent ( Unborn Babies ) should be protected

I also believe that there is a difference between Killing and Murder, Homicide and Manslaughter

Quoted: YOU INTENTIONALLY IGNORE THE FACT THAT MY POST WAS ON TOPIC -- IT ADDRESS BOTH THE APPEARANCE OF HYPOCRACY, AND THE FACT THAT SO-CALLED "BIBLICAL-LAW" ALLOWED FOR THE DEATH PENALTY. And again, you dodge the issue of the "rules" by saying "you know".  Spell 'em out, it'll make your job easier.  But that's another topic, and in the interests of above, that's the last I will say on it.

What gems your posts have been in this thread.

I many times wonder why CM Johnson likes to hang-out in this forum, but at least his post in this thread fit (some people DO need killin' -- murderers, rapists, and pedofiles) and it wasn't the flame bait that yours OBVIOUSLY was.