Nihil Obstat Posted November 22, 2009 Share Posted November 22, 2009 [quote name='CatherineM' date='21 November 2009 - 08:02 PM' timestamp='1258855362' post='2007126'] Certainly, but I firmly believe that we are only as sick as our secrets. Women who have 3D ultrasounds are many times less likely to go through with an abortion. There is a reason your classmates want to have the right to show pictures of real abortions, it is so that those on campus can't fool themselves about what it really entails. It's the same with executions. [/quote] Good point. Very good point. By the way, the courts stayed the charges. Just a week or two ago. According to the brief news report I heard, it means that the courts didn't believe they had a reasonable chance of conviction Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted November 22, 2009 Share Posted November 22, 2009 [quote name='rkwright' date='21 November 2009 - 05:47 PM' timestamp='1258850841' post='2007103'] As far as I understood Augustine, while he acknowledged the State's right to execute, he did preach against the state actually using it and often pleaded for criminals to not be executed. [/quote] I have never read anything by St. Augustine, or about St. Augustine, that would support this contention. Nevertheless, even if it were true it would concern only matters of prudence (i.e., the application of wisdom to a particular event), and could not be made a general rule of conduct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkwright Posted November 22, 2009 Share Posted November 22, 2009 [quote name='Apotheoun' date='21 November 2009 - 09:09 PM' timestamp='1258855794' post='2007134'] I have never read anything by St. Augustine, or about St. Augustine, that would support this contention. Nevertheless, even if it were true it would concern only matters of prudence (i.e., the application of wisdom to a particular event), and could not be made a general rule of conduct. [/quote] Maybe you should read some more Its out there, though I don't have time to find the passages right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HisChildForever Posted November 22, 2009 Share Posted November 22, 2009 (edited) [quote name='King's Rook's Pawn' date='21 November 2009 - 04:12 PM' timestamp='1258837927' post='2006984'] You don't need an overpriced piece of parchment to understand the difference between right and wrong. [/quote] Anyone who is in college, or who has graduated college, should be offended by this comment. That parchment symbolizes all the hard work an individual has put towards his or her education. It represents an individual's knowledge. How dare you criticize that. Edited November 22, 2009 by HisChildForever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HisChildForever Posted November 22, 2009 Share Posted November 22, 2009 (edited) [quote name='King's Rook's Pawn' date='21 November 2009 - 03:22 PM' timestamp='1258834964' post='2006973'] I think this is an entirely utilitarian argument: hideously punish one person to "make an example" for others? Why not just stick their heads on pikes on the Brooklyn Bridge? [/quote] What an absolutely ridiculous comparison. You liken the death penalty to a "hideous" punishment, and you compare it to barbarically decapitating an individual - and displaying the severed head to the public? How disgustingly sick. Perhaps you should focus on your argument, as opposed to your exaggerated emotional comments. [quote] But any society that systematically violates the rights of individuals is brutal and inhumane to me. What I'm interested in is rights. Justice should be based on having the perpetrator compensate the victim for violations of the victim's rights. [/quote] No, you are interested in overthrowing the entire criminal justice system and reestablishing it based on your fantasized ideal. Oh, and when a person violates the rights of another person, they basically give their rights away. As Knight so eloquently quoted, [b]Pope Pius XII: "When it is a question of the execution of a man condemned to death it is then reserved to the public power to deprive the condemned of the benefit of life, in expiation of his fault, [u]when already, by his fault, he has dispossessed himself of the right to live."[/u] 9/14/52.[/b] [quote] Crimes are crimes because they violate the rights of the victim; the victim of a car theft therefore has the right to retaliate by demanding full compensation. He doesn't have the right to receive just compensation and then go burn down the perpetrator's house. It's unjust. Nowadays, however, victims generally don't get compensation. However, they do get to pay the taxes necessary to keep their victimizers locked in cages, thus being victimized twice. Surely there's no justice or rationality in such a system. [/quote] Do you honestly believe that after paying the victim compensation, the perpetrator is going to see the error of his or her ways? Do you really think that is enough to rehabilitate the perpetrator? Rehabilitation is another function of the justice system. The types of rehabilitation include, but are not limited to: counseling, education, skills training, religious services. While incarceration is meant to keep an offender away from society, and is meant to serve justice, and is supposed to promote deterrence, it is also about changing that offender into a productive and healthy member of society. [quote] I'm just taking you're own utilitarian belief in "deterring" criminals and "keeping people safe from criminals" through execution to its logical conclusion. Everyone [i]might[/i] be a dangerous criminal, do you deny that? It's no surprise this where pro-death penalty arguments lead; they are anti-life arguments. [/quote] While deterrence is an inevitable function of the death penalty, it is fairly low on the list. The safety of society at large is the greatest concern. Edited November 22, 2009 by HisChildForever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted November 22, 2009 Share Posted November 22, 2009 (edited) [quote name='rkwright' date='21 November 2009 - 08:26 PM' timestamp='1258860397' post='2007160'] Maybe you should read some more Its out there, though I don't have time to find the passages right now. [/quote] Granted he wrote quite a lot, and I have only read his anti-Pelagian writings, anti-Donatist writings, his treatise on free will, along with his treatise on nature and grace, his [i]Enarrationes in Psalmos[/i], and a smattering of his homilies, but I suppose he could have said what you are talking about in some obscure text. Nevertheless, as I said in the second part of my previous post . . . [i]even if it were true it would concern only matters of prudence (i.e., the application of wisdom to a particular event), and could not be made a general rule of conduct[/i]. To put it another way, the application of the death penalty, which by its nature is case specific, falls into the realm of prudential judgments, and because each event is unique it follows that one cannot make a general rule out of the application of that punishment in a particular case, which can then be applied to all cases. Moreover, to think that this is even possible involves confusing theoretical wisdom with practical wisdom, and I hardly think that St. Augustine would support that kind of error. Edited November 22, 2009 by Apotheoun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted November 22, 2009 Share Posted November 22, 2009 (edited) [quote name='HisChildForever' date='21 November 2009 - 08:56 PM' timestamp='1258862167' post='2007167'] While deterrence is an inevitable function of the death penalty, it is fairly low on the list. The safety of society at large is the greatest concern. [/quote] I agree. Pope Pius XII - in line with the universal tradition of the Church - said that there are three principles that must be taken into account by the civil authorities in maintaining justice: (1) The rehabilitation of the criminal is to be sought [i]when this is possible[/i]. (2) Retributive justice, that is, the restoration of the social order by a punishment that is commensurate with the crime - [i]including in some cases the execution of the criminal[/i] - is to be enacted. (3) The civil authorities are duty bound to defend the common good of society by rendering the criminal harmless, [i]and this principle also includes the possible execution of the malefactor[/i]. Moreover, Pope Puis XII held that the death penalty itself can be rehabilitative, because the criminal - confronted by his own mortality - may be moved to remorse and conversion of heart. Finally, when a given punishment (even punishment unto death) is voluntarily accepted by an offender, it takes on the value of expiation, which can help to bring about the criminal's eternal salvation. Edited November 22, 2009 by Apotheoun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted November 22, 2009 Share Posted November 22, 2009 I personally have the tendency to question how capital punishment can be properly retributive. I mean.... one guy's dead, and who benefits? Anyone want to address that and help me understand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted November 22, 2009 Share Posted November 22, 2009 [quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='21 November 2009 - 09:19 PM' timestamp='1258863564' post='2007172'] I personally have the tendency to question how capital punishment can be properly retributive. I mean.... one guy's dead, and who benefits? Anyone want to address that and help me understand? [/quote] It is not about "benefits" to the family of the murdered victim; instead, it is about the just rewards for a heinous act performed against both God and man. Murder is the destruction of the image of God, and as such it is a direct attack not only against the human being who is killed, but against God Himself as the creator of that image. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted November 22, 2009 Share Posted November 22, 2009 [quote name='Apotheoun' date='21 November 2009 - 10:26 PM' timestamp='1258864013' post='2007174'] It is not about "benefits" to the family of the murdered victim; instead, it is about the just rewards for a heinous act performed against both God and man. Murder is the destruction of the image of God, and as such it is a direct attack not only against the human being who is killed, but against God Himself as the creator of that image. [/quote] Objectively though, what good is done by just ending another life? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted November 22, 2009 Share Posted November 22, 2009 [quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='21 November 2009 - 09:28 PM' timestamp='1258864124' post='2007175'] Objectively though, what good is done by just ending another life? [/quote] The objective good is the punishment of the criminal with a penalty commensurate with his crime (Genesis 9:6). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted November 22, 2009 Share Posted November 22, 2009 Ah, I see. Hm... I need to think this over. I guess the knowledge is there, but right now the understanding isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG45 Posted November 22, 2009 Share Posted November 22, 2009 [quote name='King's Rook's Pawn']In an age of maximum security prisons, you cannot reasonably argue that the death penalty is needed to defend you against prisoners.[/quote] Hmm, some might disagree, including the staff members and inmates alike who were killed during the Lucasville riot. A riot which did result in some death penalties after an investigation in which hundreds of interviews were conducted, forensic evidence was examined, and counter-lawsuits were filed regarding whether prisoners rights were violated when the facility was retaken due to photographs being taken of the inmates during processing. [quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='21 November 2009 - 06:37 PM' timestamp='1258843079' post='2007027'] Do you think it might turn into a big spectacle for.... sicker people? [/quote] Not addressed to me, but I agree with Catherine, it would draw crowds. Back when executions were public events in some nations, it was not unusual for an entire town to show up and watch the condemned person jerking there on a rope. [quote name='King's Rook's Pawn' date='21 November 2009 - 05:12 PM' timestamp='1258837927' post='2006984'] You don't need an overpriced piece of parchment to understand the difference between right and wrong. [/quote] No, but it helps in getting a job. Especially when you work your rear off for scholarships, grants, etc. and have absolutely zero debt upon graduation with that "overpriced piece of parchment". [quote name='HisChildForever' date='21 November 2009 - 11:43 PM' timestamp='1258861426' post='2007166'] Anyone who is in college, or who has graduated college, should be offended by this comment. That parchment symbolizes all the hard work an individual has put towards his or her education. It represents an individual's knowledge. How dare you criticize that. [/quote] Pretty much. Constant hours of homework and learning, time spent helping others as well, community service as extra credit in some courses or of one's own accord, visiting prison facilities, visiting halfway houses, visiting courtrooms, engaging in internships, as well as maintaining and growing in faith. Meeting with a man who got off of death row and with women who comitted everything from social security fraud to murder. Add on that keeping a job (in my case more than one as a company I worked for went Chapter 13) during that time to help pay for what scholarships don't and it can be a long ordeal to earn that degree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatherineM Posted November 22, 2009 Share Posted November 22, 2009 As someone with 175 hours undergrad, and 105 grad hours, I think I was offended by that remark as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anomaly Posted November 22, 2009 Author Share Posted November 22, 2009 [quote name='King's Rook's Pawn' date='21 November 2009 - 02:32 PM' timestamp='1258828323' post='2006921'] If we were following my ideal of voluntaryism, there would be no penalties for victimless crimes whatsoever (e.g. pot smoking and insider trading) and even penalties for actual crimes with victims would be focused on compensating the victim (e.g. an embezzler who pilfered $1000 from his company would be required to pay back the $1000). Thus, confinement of any sort would only be limited to people who are so dangerous that there is reason to keep them under surveillance. Prisons, thus, would be much emptier, insofar as they existed, and they wouldn't be interested in "punishment," just in confinement for security purposes. Perhaps, house arrest would become more common.[/quote] It's obvious to me you've never visited prison or know any convicted felons well.... Under voluntaryism if you steal $1,000 and you must forfeit $1,000, isn't that a buck for a buck? What if you rape or kill someone in a fit of rage, but aren't likely to get that angry again. In other words, you don't believe in consequences as being a deterent. Stealing is like an intrest free loan and it ain't wrong if you ain't caught. It's interesting that nobody did a little research on these two cases and were able to create fantisized motives. The teenage son confessed to molesting the little girl and told his parents. The teenage girl strangled, stabbed, cut the throat, and dismembered the 9 year old, filling TWO graves she dug days before. The 9 year old was the first convenient prey. Where was Jesus for the little 9 year old girl and her parents? How does God's justice work for her, her siblings, her parents, her grandparents? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now