Can A Devout Catholic?

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1289253635' post='2185842']
It means that its primary purpose is to punish, to redress the disorder introduced by the offense.
[/quote]

Redress means "to remedy or set right." How is it possible for men to "set right" a crime by inflicting violence on the evildoer? Is the public order satiated by blood?

~Sternhauser

Edited November 8, 2010 by Sternhauser

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1289253756' post='2185844']
Redress means "to remedy or set right." How is it possible for men to "set right" a crime by inflicting violence on the evildoer?

~Sternhauser
[/quote]

Loaded question, but anyway, punishment must be equal to the crime committed, so that that punishment redresses the crime committed. If one steals money or objects they can repay that debt, but if one committs murder they take a life that is priceless, the only thing equal to that is the criminals own life, which he forfeits by the act of murder.

"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, when already, by his fault, he has dispossessed himself of the right to live." - Pius XII

Edited November 8, 2010 by KnightofChrist

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1289254241' post='2185846']
Loaded question, but anyway, punishment must be equal to the crime committed, so that that punishment redresses the crime committed.
[/quote]

Let me rephrase that. "The flugzoogle must be equal to the crime committed, so that the flugzoogle can remedy/make right the crime committed. This is manifest."

I want to find out what punishment is, and what it accomplishes. So far, all you've said is "punishment accomplishes punishment."

~Sternhauser

Edited November 8, 2010 by Sternhauser

[Winchester]

[quote name='Mark of the Cross' timestamp='1289251434' post='2185834']
Petty thieves are just as capable of violence when locked up as murderers! The prison guard could be their first victim, so you want execution for all prisoners?[/QUOTE]
Anyone can pull break into my house, but I'll only deal with the people who do. Violent criminals are proven to be violent, so that can be taken into account for future behavior. Prisoners also escape and this must also be taken into account.


[quote]
Guards, Soldiers and law enforcers are in danger, but they chose their career. Some for honourable reasons, many because they like the danger and excitement and some even enjoy the power that they have over people and the confrontation. The victims of crime mostly don't have a choice about their safety.
[/quote]
This is true, but they are under no obligation to submit themselves to even greater danger in the name of protecting proven violent individuals.

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1289254410' post='2185848']
This is true, but they are under no obligation to submit themselves to even greater danger in the name of protecting proven violent individuals.
[/quote]

Hey, this is the way the corrections/court system runs. That's the way it is. If they don't like the terms of their job, they can find a voluntarily-paid job. Or move out of America. Speaking up for common sense solutions and advocating moral behavior is not an option. Love it or leave it. Those are the options.

~Sternhauser

Edited November 8, 2010 by Sternhauser

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1289254362' post='2185847']
Let me rephrase that. "The flugzoogle must be equal to the crime committed, so that the flugzoogle can remedy/make right the crime committed. This is manifest."

I want to find out what punishment is, and what it accomplishes. So far, all you've said is "punishment accomplishes punishment."

~Sternhauser
[/quote]

Having to answer questions you know the answer to would be one example.
[url="http://www.catholicreference.net/index.cfm?id=35910"]
[b][size="2"]PUNISHMENT[/size][/b]
[/url]
[b] [/b]
Any ill suffered in consequence of wrongdoing. It has three functions, which ideally should be retributive as serving the offended person, corrective for the offender, and deterrent for the community at large. Punishment is retributive because it pays back the offender for his crime and re-establishes the balance of justice, which has been outraged. It is corrective when directed to improving the offender and rehabilitating his as a member of society. It is deterrent as a means of forestalling similar wrongdoing by others.

Some theorists hold, with Plato, that no one does wrong voluntarily. On these premises, punishment may never be retributive but only corrective or deterrent. Christianity, however, believes that because human beings are free they are responsible for their misdeeds and therefore liable to punishment that gives them their just deserts. It is therefore moral to punish the guilty even if there is no hope of correcting that person or deterring others from crime.

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1289255084' post='2185863']
Having to answer questions you know the answer to would be one example.
[url="http://www.catholicreference.net/index.cfm?id=35910"]
[b][size="2"]PUNISHMENT[/size][/b]
[/url]
[b] [/b]
Any ill suffered in consequence of wrongdoing. It has three functions, which ideally should be retributive as serving the offended person, corrective for the offender, and deterrent for the community at large. Punishment is retributive because it pays back the offender for his crime and re-establishes the balance of justice, which has been outraged. It is corrective when directed to improving the offender and rehabilitating his as a member of society. It is deterrent as a means of forestalling similar wrongdoing by others.

Some theorists hold, with Plato, that no one does wrong voluntarily. On these premises, punishment may never be retributive but only corrective or deterrent. Christianity, however, believes that because human beings are free they are responsible for their misdeeds and therefore liable to punishment that gives them their just deserts. It is therefore moral to punish the guilty even if there is no hope of correcting that person or deterring others from crime.
[/quote]

[i]This[/i] is the type of thing I'm looking for. Did you see that last sentence? Correction and deterrence are not intrinsic to the essence of punishment.

Let's go on to "retribution." What does Fr. Hardon mean by "paying back" the offender? Sounds like revenge! Vengeance is God's.

How does inflicting violence upon an evildoer "re-establish the balance of justice?" It does not serve me if violence is inflicted upon my attacker for what he did to me. It cannot take away what was done. If my friend were murdered, it would not restore my friend, or anything about my friend. If, on the other hand, the man took money from me, that could be restored to me, but still, justice would not be "restored," any more than [i]virginity [/i]can be "restored."

~Sternhauser

Edited November 8, 2010 by Sternhauser

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1289254410' post='2185848']

This is true, but they are under no obligation to submit themselves to even greater danger in the name of protecting proven violent individuals.
[/quote]
Base jumping is dangerous.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1289255572' post='2185866']
[i]This[/i] is the type of thing I'm looking for. Did you see that last sentence? Correction and deterrence are not intrinsic to the essence of punishment. [/quote]

Oh yes I do indeed, it means that the offender can be punished even if it will not correct him or deter others.

[quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1289255572' post='2185866']Let's go on to "retribution." What does Fr. Hardon mean by "paying back" the offender? Sounds like revenge! Vengeance is God's. [/quote]

The Civil Authorities, act as God's avenger to execute His anger on those who are wicked. [i]Romans 13:4[/i]


[quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1289255572' post='2185866']How does inflicting violence upon an evildoer "re-establish the balance of justice?" It does not serve me if violence is inflicted upon my attacker for what he did to me. It cannot take away what was done. If my friend were murdered, it would not restore my friend, or anything about my friend. If, on the other hand, the man took money from me, that could be restored to me, but still, justice would not be "restored," any more than [i]virginity [/i]can be "restored." [/quote]

It does not return what was lost in that sense. It returns a right for a wrong. Like it or not it is right to punishment criminals, and some criminals can only repay that debt with their lives.

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1289258040' post='2185876']
The Civil Authorities, act as God's avenger to execute His anger on those who are wicked. [i]Romans 13:4[/i][/quote]
Locusts with [i]six[/i] legs do the same thing. Not to be trite, but, what does that prove?


[quote]It does not return what was lost in that sense. It returns a right for a wrong. Like it or not it is right to punishment criminals, and some criminals can only repay that debt with their lives.
[/quote]
In other words, you can't answer my question.

~Sternhauser

Edited November 8, 2010 by Sternhauser

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1289258285' post='2185878']
Locusts with [i]six[/i] legs do the same thing. Not to be trite, but, what does that prove? [/quote]


That the Civil Authorities act on behave of God as it deals with punishing the wicked. Since you attempted to make the argument that only God can punish, or so it seemed.



[quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1289258285' post='2185878']In other words, you can't answer my question.

~Sternhauser
[/quote]

Nah you just don't understand. Punishment pays back the offender for his crime and re-establishes the balance of justice. The criminal committed a crime a wrong, based on his merit the criminal must be rewarded. The only real [i]violence[/i], if it is even correct to use such a loaded term would be the taking of the life of a murderer. That I've explained, because the only thing equal to the victims life is the life of the murderer, and by the act of murder the aggressor forfeits his life. It is not really violence per se to be locked away in prison, or to be force to pay back money you stole, or work off your debt on the side of the road picking up soda bottles, and trash.

Edited November 8, 2010 by KnightofChrist

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1289255084' post='2185863']

Any ill suffered in consequence of wrongdoing. It has three functions, which ideally should be retributive as serving the offended person, corrective for the offender, and deterrent for the community at large. Punishment is retributive because it pays back the offender for his crime and re-establishes the balance of justice, which has been outraged. It is corrective when directed to improving the offender and rehabilitating his as a member of society. It is deterrent as a means of forestalling similar wrongdoing by others.

[/quote]

Jesus said if someone strikes you on your left cheek offer him your right cheek. If a good man or friend strikes you in anger and you strike him back the melee will continue to a possible detriment. However if you offer him to hit you again it can have a positive result. If you are at the ATM and a drug crazes mugger wants to stab you, I hardly think it appropriate to offer him your intestines. Here we see that Jesus is aiming at the [u]possibility[/u] of a corrective outcome for the friend who struck you and a deterrent for an onlooker who will realise the good that has come from it. However Jesus does not seem to seek retribution. At the core of Christian belief is the forgiveness of sins achieved at the sacrament of confession. Where is retribution? The priest may ask you to say some hail Mary's, but this is more for your own contemplation of your sin hoping that you won't re-offend. Corrective!
In Christianity a victim is expected to forgive their oppressor and not to seek retribution. And Ideally the law should only be concerned with correction and deterrence. The average person has no idea of balance in retribution. A person will argue for compassion for a loved one who has committed a heinous crime, but then demand long jail sentences for a person who has made an error and killed their loved one in a car accident.

[quote]Some theorists hold, with Plato, that no one does wrong voluntarily. On these premises, punishment may never be retributive but only corrective or deterrent. Christianity, however, believes that because human beings are free they are responsible for their misdeeds and therefore liable to punishment that gives them their just deserts.[/quote]

I agree with Plato, we sin because of satan. Therefore retribution should be toward satan and correction and deterrent to the person to teach people not to beleave satan.

[quote]It is therefore moral to punish the guilty even if there is no hope of correcting that person or deterring others from crime.[/quote]

If there is no hope of correcting or deterring someone from crime then they should be locked up for the safety of the public even if the time is disproportionate to the crime. None of the three objectives are applicable.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Mark of the Cross' timestamp='1289259426' post='2185884']
Jesus said if someone strikes you on your left cheek offer him your right cheek. If a good man or friend strikes you in anger and you strike him back the melee will continue to a possible detriment. However if you offer him to hit you again it can have a positive result. If you are at the ATM and a drug crazes mugger wants to stab you, I hardly think it appropriate to offer him your intestines. Here we see that Jesus is aiming at the [u]possibility[/u] of a corrective outcome for the friend who struck you and a deterrent for an onlooker who will realise the good that has come from it. However Jesus does not seem to seek retribution. At the core of Christian belief is the forgiveness of sins achieved at the sacrament of confession. Where is retribution? The priest may ask you to say some hail Mary's, but this is more for your own contemplation of your sin hoping that you won't re-offend. Corrective!
In Christianity a victim is expected to forgive their oppressor and not to seek retribution. And Ideally the law should only be concerned with correction and deterrence. The average person has no idea of balance in retribution. A person will argue for compassion for a loved one who has committed a heinous crime, but then demand long jail sentences for a person who has made an error and killed their loved one in a car accident.[/quote]

The Civil Authorities however have a duty to restore order when an evil is committed. For an individual to do so would be vigilantism, and unjust revenge. While the individual must turn the other cheek the Civil Authorities must restore order and Justice.

[quote name='Mark of the Cross' timestamp='1289259426' post='2185884']I agree with Plato, we sin because of satan. Therefore retribution should be toward satan and correction and deterrent to the person to teach people not to beleave satan.[/quote]

Then don't you disagree with Christianity and free will?

[quote name='Mark of the Cross' timestamp='1289259426' post='2185884']If there is no hope of correcting or deterring someone from crime then they should be locked up for the safety of the public even if the time is disproportionate to the crime. None of the three objectives are applicable.
[/quote]

Locked up is retributive punishment, and the crime to be just must be proportionate to the crime. Giving an individual more time that should be given would be unjust.

Edited November 8, 2010 by KnightofChrist

[KnightofChrist]

Brother Stern and Mark while I would love to continue our discussion, life is calling, perhaps Winnie can answer any further questions.

Pax and God Bless!

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1289259909' post='2185888']
The Civil Authorities however have a duty to restore order when an evil is committed. For an individual to do so would be vigilantism, and unjust revenge. While the individual must turn the other cheek the Civil Authorities must restore order and Justice.
[/quote]
I have no issue with that statement. I'm just pointing out that retribution has no place in law. The laws are for the protection of the innocent and to maintain social order. Their concern should be correction and deterrence. In Christianity, retribution if I'm not mistaken is the same as revenge which is sinful. And I think leaving revenge to God is a misnomer. As we've discussed before with Cain and Abel, God prefers that we learn by living in a world without him! Our choice which has resulted in one which has 'Thistles and Thorns' and mortality. Not for revenge, but because he is not here! He has with sadness given us the freedom that we asked for. The 'correction' of mankind comes from life. It is not for us to take it away from someone or to kill ourselves to escape it. After we have learnt our lesson I'm pretty sure we will be deterred from a repeat. At death we are either united with God in a euphoric existence described as Paradise or are forever isolated from him a pain and empty loneliness by the loss of Gods love which can only be described as Hell.

[quote]Then don't you disagree with Christianity and free will?
[/quote]
I don't know what you mean? Is Plato disagreeing with Christianity? The statement that we don't do wrong voluntarily is not disagreeing with free will. God made us in his image which means we are intrinsically good. satan leads us into temptation. We have been given free will to follow satan to our doom or to work toward a homecoming to God where we belong. Neither is being forced on us we are free to choose.

[quote]Locked up is punishment, and the crime to be just must be proportionate to the crime. Giving an individual more time that should be given would be unjust.

[/quote]
So a mentally ill person that attempted to kill someone should be locked up for a short period applicable to attempted murder and then allowed back into society knowing that this person will most probably kill someone. Oh woe is us! We even lock up mentally ill people who have committed no crime but are a danger to society and themselves.