Is this true?

[BelindaP]

Absolutely I support the death penalty.
In fact, I think, instead of allowing the offenders to drift peacefully off to sleep, we should go back to the good old Bible and start stoning people again.
Now, when someone is given the death penalty, the only people that witness it are the immediate family of the victim. The problem is, whenever a crime is committed, there is not just one victim. When someone in a town is murdered, the whole town is paralyzed until that person is caught. Children can't play outside without their parents watching them every moment. Husbands don't want their wives out at night by themselves.
When God instituted stoning, He knew what He was doing.
Yes, it may seem barbaric, but that is because we are soft people.
In the Bible days, when a person was convicted of a crime worthy of death the whole town would gather for the stoning. The immediate family of the victim would be the first people to throw the stones, then it would progress outward until ever person in the town took part in the sentence. This did two things:
1. It showed that every person in the town was affected by the crime committed, in some way, so they were allowed to take some part in the sentence.
2. It allowed each person to see the punishment for certain crimes. When you have held a stone in your hand and thrown it at the head of someone convicted of murder, taking part in the punishment, you will be much less likely to do something worthy of death in the future.

Please, please, please tell me you're kidding.

 

[GreenMunchkin]

I'm against the death penalty. Biblical death penalities were under the old covenant and mandated by God. Modern death penalties are mndated by corrupt governments.

Also, if someone isn't saved, by killing them we condemn them to hell. Life in prison - and "life" should mean life - is a far greater punishment, *and* gives the person time to come to Christ.

 

[sageoffools]

Absolutely I support the death penalty.
In fact, I think, instead of allowing the offenders to drift peacefully off to sleep, we should go back to the good old Bible and start stoning people again.
Now, when someone is given the death penalty, the only people that witness it are the immediate family of the victim. The problem is, whenever a crime is committed, there is not just one victim. When someone in a town is murdered, the whole town is paralyzed until that person is caught. Children can't play outside without their parents watching them every moment. Husbands don't want their wives out at night by themselves.
When God instituted stoning, He knew what He was doing.
Yes, it may seem barbaric, but that is because we are soft people.
In the Bible days, when a person was convicted of a crime worthy of death the whole town would gather for the stoning. The immediate family of the victim would be the first people to throw the stones, then it would progress outward until ever person in the town took part in the sentence. This did two things:
1. It showed that every person in the town was affected by the crime committed, in some way, so they were allowed to take some part in the sentence.
2. It allowed each person to see the punishment for certain crimes. When you have held a stone in your hand and thrown it at the head of someone convicted of murder, taking part in the punishment, you will be much less likely to do something worthy of death in the future.

Please, please, please tell me you're kidding.

Absolutely not! I realize it may seem harsh but,
Why should a man be allowed to rape and torture a 10 year old girl for a month, then cut her body into pieces and dump her into a lake somewhere, and then when we sentence him he is either:
1. sentenced to sit in a warm cell, with cable TV, free healthcare, free education, a free gym to work out in and 3 hot meals every day.
2. sentenced to a obscenely short sentence by some moron judge, or technicality, so he goes to his nice jail cell for a few years, then gets out and lives the rest of his life like nothing happened. or
3. Is (God forbid!) by some miracle actually sentenced to death and, after living in his nice warm cell for 10-15 years, is allowed to slip peacefully into the afterlife.
It makes me nauseas!
I mean, good grief! If I am a homeless guy living on the street, I would commit a crime, just so I could be warm and fed every day!

 

[sageoffools]

I'm against the death penalty. Biblical death penalities were under the old covenant and mandated by God. Modern death penalties are mndated by corrupt governments.

Also, if someone isn't saved, by killing them we condemn them to hell. Life in prison - and "life" should mean life - is a far greater punishment, *and* gives the person time to come to Christ.

Hey Greenie!!!
Where is your munchkin?

 

[Albion]

I'm against the death penalty. Biblical death penalities were under the old covenant and mandated by God. Modern death penalties are mandated by corrupt governments.

But is there a place in the New Testament where the practice is forbidden? I can't think of any, so to think this was set aside seems to be wishful thinking. At the same time, Christ taught obedience to the secular powers, so it doesn't change anything to say that the governments utilizing capital punishment are nice, dictatorial, or whatever. You can't find many that were or are less harsh than the government Jesus lived under.

Also, if someone isn't saved, by killing them we condemn them to hell. Life in prison - and "life" should mean life - is a far greater punishment, *and* gives the person time to come to Christ.

Possibly, but they could just as easily go in a Christian and come out a non-believer.

 

[Criada]

This is a human being you are talking about.
Made in the image of God - and loved by Him.
And as deserving of forgiveness as any of us.
I am no better than that man in the eyes of God - and yet He has redeemed me and called me His child.

How can it be right to condemn one of God's beloved creations to hell? Because that is what you are doing if you execute an unsaved person.

And
2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

 

[Criada]

Possibly, but they could just as easily go in a Christian and come out a non-believer.

Um... weren't you just arguing OSAS in the other thread...
How does that work?

 

[sageoffools]

This is a human being you are talking about.
Made in the image of God - and loved by Him.
And as deserving of forgiveness as any of us.
I am no better than that man in the eyes of God - and yet He has redeemed me and called me His child.

How can it be right to condemn one of God's beloved creations to hell? Because that is what you are doing if you execute an unsaved person.

And
2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

Isn't that what God did when He told the children of Israel to wipe out the Moabites and the Ammonites and the Amorites and the Hittites, and all of the other Cannanites? He didn't just say "Shoo them away" God told the Israelites to kill every one of them, including their women and children.

 

[BelindaP]

*Unsubscribing*

 

[Criada]

Isn't that what God did when He told the children of Israel to wipe out the Moabites and the Ammonites and the Amorites and the Hittites, and all of the other Cannanites? He didn't just say "Shoo them away" God told the Israelites to kill every one of them, including their women and children.

I think you are confusing warfare with capital punishment.
Also the old covenant and the new....

 

[Albion]

Um... weren't you just arguing OSAS in the other thread...
How does that work?

First, I took no stand on the OSAS question. I mainly asked questions of those who quickly dismissed it. Check the names of those who voted on the question and you won't find mine there.

Second, I was only responding to the logic expressed by another who said prisoners might become Christians in jail. If that is so, they might also cease to be Christians while there. I didn't approach the matter with a determination to take sides, freewill vs. OSAS, but just took it as it stood.

 

[Criada]

k.
Sorry - misunderstood what you were saying.
Apologies.

 

[Apollo Celestio]

Law = Death indeed. This is terrible. I cannot support the death penalty, not here. Even when they deserve it. And they do sometimes.

 

[Criada]

Law = Death indeed. This is terrible. I cannot support the death penalty, not here. Even when they deserve it. And they do sometimes.

But then, we all do!

The wages of sin is death.

But the price has been paid for everyone, no matter what they have done.

 

[jive4005]

After religion class today, I learned that most conservative Christians support the Death penalty. Especially in America. Here, where the justice system isn't perfect and you have corruption within the government, yet we support the death penalty? I guess I could see if it were actually a just government, but not here. Is this really true? Do you really support this?

Yes, it's true. I don't "get it" either. Guess I'm in minority, hoping soon to help make us the majority. Prayer works!

rev

 

[PenelopePitstop2]

Having been involved in Prison ministry for some years, I was given a report about capital puinishment and its effectiveness as a deterrant to crime. In fact you will find that the death penalty does not in any way deter people from committing heinous crimes any more than the threat of hell makes people turn to Christ. You can compare this by looking at capital crimes figures across places where the death penalty is given versus those that use imprisonment.

I believe the penal reform report I read was written or at least endorsed by Lord Justice Wolf but it has been over 10 years since I read it. It makes very interesting reading.

The biggest problem with prison sentencing is that largely due to technicalities and outdated laws, those who commit crime are often sentenced to shorter times than would fit the crime and life does not mean life in many cases. This leads to society feeling frustrated that the state is not administering justice as they should and leads to people wanting harsher deterrants and vigilante thinking.

As a christian, it is not my place to judge who deserves death and if most of us are honest we would not be happy to be the one carrying out the killing in order to administer justice. So we place that responsibilty on someone else. If it were your child who was the criminal could you personally hang him, strap him to a chair and electrocute him? Is it right to expect another man to kill criminals on demand of the state?

And what about miscarriages of justice? In the UK we have had people hung who were exhonerated after their death. A bit late for 'sorry I was wrong' then isn't it.

A closer look at the fabrication of society today will expose the reasons for the increase in violent crime that has nothing at all to do with the severity of sentencing. To me it seems the easy way out. Rather than look for the root cause, let's just kill those who have killed and raped because it will make us feel that something was done. But its too late, the damage is already done, the rape has already damaged that person, the mudered are already dead. What do we gain by killing a man? It does not change what has happened or make things better

 

[IamRedeemed]

I hope you're right. It's not the kind of thing I think we would hear on the news whether someone was afforded the opportunity or not to repent and receive Christ. Especially since the secular media hates the Lord. But, I realize there are many prison ministries, but I have no way of knowing with the kind of assurance you seem to have, that everyone who received or is getting ready to receive the carried out sentence of death, has been or will be afforded that opportunity.

I realize the death penalty serves as consequence to the one receiving it, but I disagree with you that IF it were carried out across the states as an automatic sentence for X crime, that it would not serve as a deterrent to other would be offenders.

Countries that do hold such strict policies do tend to have a lot less social crime. Those that will carry out a mandatory sentences such as death for x crime, cane people for x, and cut their hands off for x and castrate them for x etc.

The one thing I have never heard of is someone on death row not having and opportunity to repent and receive Christ (in the USA).

The wages of sin is death.

Christianity is founded on the death penalty. There was no more "wrongful" death than that of Christ; and non is more honored or revered, nor was any more necessary that others be saved.

If we have a problem with the death penalty why not Judges/courts in general? Just forgive them all and set all offenders free? What is the alternative? Life in prison? What sort of life is that? How humane are we if we lock someone away for all their days? The death penalty is not about deterrents but about consequences for actions.

 

[IamRedeemed]

That is only because most people believe it won't happen to them. They see how easy the system is to manipulate and how few people are ever actually executed. If it was mandatory and was carried out without the decades of appeals, I believe most assuredly the crimes that would receive such mandatory sentences would absolutely go down.

Having been involved in Prison ministry for some years, I was given a report about capital puinishment and its effectiveness as a deterrant to crime. In fact you will find that the death penalty does not in any way deter people from committing heinous crimes any more than the threat of hell makes people turn to Christ. You can compare this by looking at capital crimes figures across places where the death penalty is given versus those that use imprisonment.

I believe the penal reform report I read was written or at least endorsed by Lord Justice Wolf but it has been over 10 years since I read it. It makes very interesting reading.

The biggest problem with prison sentencing is that largely due to technicalities and outdated laws, those who commit crime are often sentenced to shorter times than would fit the crime and life does not mean life in many cases. This leads to society feeling frustrated that the state is not administering justice as they should and leads to people wanting harsher deterrants and vigilante thinking.

As a christian, it is not my place to judge who deserves death and if most of us are honest we would not be happy to be the one carrying out the killing in order to administer justice. So we place that responsibilty on someone else. If it were your child who was the criminal could you personally hang him, strap him to a chair and electrocute him? Is it right to expect another man to kill criminals on demand of the state?

And what about miscarriages of justice? In the UK we have had people hung who were exhonerated after their death. A bit late for 'sorry I was wrong' then isn't it.

A closer look at the fabrication of society today will expose the reasons for the increase in violent crime that has nothing at all to do with the severity of sentencing. To me it seems the easy way out. Rather than look for the root cause, let's just kill those who have killed and raped because it will make us feel that something was done. But its too late, the damage is already done, the rape has already damaged that person, the mudered are already dead. What do we gain by killing a man? It does not change what has happened or make things better

 

[BelindaP]

I'd like to see statisics on what you're asserting here. Countries like you describe have serious crime problems AFAIK. People who committ heinous crimes typically don't fear death. In fact, many seek it. Look at Europe. Virtually none of the countries has a death penalty, and yet crime in Western Europe is much lower than in the U.S.

 

[PenelopePitstop2]

Interesting article which shows America to have one of the highest crime rates. Pasted from http://europe.tiscali.co.uk/148478.html

If you have to be a prisoner, better to be one in Finland. The Nordic country began a prison reform 20 years ago and now jails fewer of its citizens than any other country in the European Union. Fifty-two per 100,000 inhabitants. And the prison system is remarkably lenient. Finns have instituted a system referred to as open prisons, thanks to academic studies that provoked a thorough-going rethink of penal policy with the argument that it ought to reflect the region's liberal theories of social organization (Finland is well-known for its liberal welfare state).

According to this system, hard time, because of its restrictions on freedom, is punishment enough so prisons are made as comfortable as possible. More importantly the emphasis of punishment is to shape values and reinsert inmates back into society rather than vindicate the crime committed.Prisons in Finland do not have walls or fences but camera surveillance and electronic alert networks. No iron gates, metal passageways or grim cells; living spaces for inmates resemble dormitory rooms more than lockups in a slammer. Guards are unarmed and wear either civilian clothes or uniforms free of emblems like chevrons and epaulettes. Guns are only used to transfer prisoners. Inmates and guards address each other by first name. Prison superintendents go by non-military titles like manager or governor, and prisoners are sometimes referred to as "clients" or, if they are youths, "pupils."

Generous home leaves are available, particularly as the end of a sentence nears, and for midterm inmates, there are houses on the grounds, with privacy assured, where they can spend up to four days at a time with visiting spouses and children.Since the time of instituting this unique system, Finnish crime rates have gone down to average Scandinavian levels, the lowest in Europe, and the state has saved almost ¬ 20 million worth of expense keeping up prisons.

Portugal, with 131 prisoners per 100,000 people, has the highest percentage of prisoners per capita in the EU. The small country on the Atlantic is followed by Britain with 126, Spain with 116, Germany with 97, Italy with 93, Luxembourg with 90, the Netherlands with 87, Austria and Belgium with 85, Ireland with 78, Greece with 76, France with 75, Sweden with 64, and Denmark with 62. Even so, the EU, seen globally, is relatively lenient compared to the United States with 702 prisoners per 100,000 inhabitants, and Russia with 664. Considering statistics that imply that harsh punishment does nothing to reduce the crime rate (indeed it seems that it tends to lead to increased crime), and considering the Finnish example of low crime and low national expenditure on penal services, it is a small wonder that other countries have not adopted something similar.