JP2Iloveyou Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 [quote name='toledo_jesus' date='Dec 13 2005, 07:54 AM']agreed except he most definitely [i]should[/i] have been executed. [right][snapback]823151[/snapback][/right] [/quote] I don't know if we can justify that with Catholic moral theology. Honestly, I have mixed feelings about it and I have learned to not trust feelings. I trust sound reasoning and logic. Emotion fluctuates to much to provide a meaningful barometer for determining a course of action. In that case, I say, err on the side of caution. Personally, I like the idea of solitary confinement at night and chain gang work during the day. In order for life imprisonment to be worse than the DP, it must be very unpleasant. I have no problem with forcing him to work 12 hours a day in the hot sun fixing roads or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JP2Iloveyou Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 [quote name='Cam42' date='Dec 13 2005, 07:57 AM']You can't put the sins of others on him. You know that is not a correct view. [right][snapback]823155[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Fair enough, and I agree. My point is that he started a gang, by his own admission. This gang has murdered, raped, robbed, tortured, and dealt drugs among countless other crimes to thousands of people. It seems that he is at least indirectly responsible for this. I mean, if a parent teaches his child to use the Lord's name in vain and the child does, then certainly the child is at fault, but I think the parent assumes some blame there as well. In this case, Williams was the "parent" of this gang if you will and "taught" them to kill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toledo_jesus Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 [quote name='JP2Iloveyou' date='Dec 13 2005, 07:58 AM']I don't know if we can justify that with Catholic moral theology. Honestly, I have mixed feelings about it and I have learned to not trust feelings. I trust sound reasoning and logic. Emotion fluctuates to much to provide a meaningful barometer for determining a course of action. In that case, I say, err on the side of caution. Personally, I like the idea of solitary confinement at night and chain gang work during the day. In order for life imprisonment to be worse than the DP, it must be very unpleasant. I have no problem with forcing him to work 12 hours a day in the hot sun fixing roads or something. [right][snapback]823158[/snapback][/right] [/quote] which could very well kill him anyway. 51 year old men tend to have heart attacks and stuff. You know what, our laws were violated and the punishment carried out. God will sort it out if (big if) we made a mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cam42 Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 [quote name='toledo_jesus' date='Dec 13 2005, 09:54 AM']agreed except he most definitely [i]should[/i] have been executed. [right][snapback]823151[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Why? Because California was incapable of keeping the concrete conditions of the common good and stay more in conformity to the dignity of the human person? What does that say about California? Wouldn't it be better if it had been able to limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person? Does the possibility by which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself not exist in California? How is this case an absolute necessity? And how is this case not rare? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 [quote name='toledo_jesus' date='Dec 13 2005, 09:01 AM'] God will sort it out if (big if) we made a mistake. [right][snapback]823161[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Hmm what else can we apply that logic to? Abortion? Gay Marriage? Divorce? Its a slippery slope to leave ourselves unaccountable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cam42 Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 [quote name='toledo_jesus' date='Dec 13 2005, 10:01 AM']which could very well kill him anyway. 51 year old men tend to have heart attacks and stuff. You know what, our laws were violated and the punishment carried out. God will sort it out if (big if) we made a mistake. [right][snapback]823161[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Are you serious? So do 15 year old kids. We can't hope for natural death in that manner. That is uncharitable. You know what. The punishment was NOT just. And God already sorted it out. However, hot stuff is correct. From a responsible human point of view, you are on a slippery slope. Catholics and Christians do not hope or call for death in that manner. And we don't simply assume that God will sort it out. And was it a mistake? I think so AND I have shown why. Lest my post #49 from the other page is missed because it is at the bottom of page two, that is directed at you and I would love to know your informed answers. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThomasDM Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 (edited) [quote name='Philippe' date='Dec 12 2005, 05:42 PM']i still dont like the death penalty [right][snapback]822355[/snapback][/right] [/quote] I agree with you there. The death penalty is just plain scary and hypocritical. It's sad to see convicts being killed, in many cases just to save money and space in the prisons that are over crowded because people don't want to face up to social problems that need to be delt with. The death penalty was outlawed in my province here after evidence was found that someone who was executed...was actually inoccent, and framed. It happens. Sometimes people get sent to jail for stupid reasons, our politicians make mistakes. From what I hear Tookie had reformed, he was working to try and keep youths out of gangs. What better person to speak on it than him? California has done the world a great injustice by putting out this light, who knows how many gang members he could have reformed. I read the book 'Monster: Autobiography of an L.A. gang member.' He was also a crip, and it was an amazing story. Very violent, not for the faint of heart. But in the end, he turned to God [Allah] and completely changed himself. Now he's dedicated to preventing youth from joining gangs. He joined when he was only eleven, his initiation was murdering people of an opposing gang. He took many lives. As did Tookie. But we only made things worse by preventing him from saving lives. The Death Penalty makes me sick, and I never agree with it. If someone absolutely cannot be prevented from killing then they belong in a mental institution. When the Church provides loopholes for things like the Death Penalty, War, and so on...it is as a LAST resort. Still I see a lot of Phatmassers trying to jump the gun and use church doctrine to defend very unchristian things. Plus I've been really uneasy about the Death Penalty since that guy was executed for blasphemy 2000 years ago. Peace, -Tom Edited December 13, 2005 by ThomasDM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 If you deliberately tak the life on an innocent human you forfeit your life in return and the state has a right to execute you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cam42 Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 [quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Dec 13 2005, 11:30 AM']If you deliberately tak the life on an innocent human you forfeit your life in return and the state has a right to execute you. [right][snapback]823224[/snapback][/right] [/quote] And just how do you reconcile that viewpoint with the accepted Catholic catechetical teaching? And how would you answer the questions that I posed to toledo_jesus, in an informed and complete manner? Here is said teaching: [quote name='CCC #2267']Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, [b]if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.[/b] [b]If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means[/b], as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person. Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically non-existent."[/quote] (emphasis mine) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luthien Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 "I like the way it sounded"- Stanley Tookie Williams refering to the sound his victims bodies made when he shot them with his sawed off shotgun. I don't know how to feel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JP2Iloveyou Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 (edited) cmom, simply because the state has the right doesn't mean that they should exercise it. In all honesty, I think a lot of Catholics are very inconsistent here. They want to cut Church documents like Evangelium Vitae two ways. What the Holy Father said cannot be any clearer. Paragraph 2267 of the Catechism cannot be any clearer. I don't reject the claim that the death penalty is allowed under Catholic social teaching as well as moral and natural law. However, far to many "conservative" Catholics want to embrace all of JPII's writings on abortion, euthanasia, reforms to the liturgy, etc. while conveniently ignoring his clear teaching on capital punishment. Edited December 13, 2005 by JP2Iloveyou Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Adam Posted December 13, 2005 Author Share Posted December 13, 2005 [quote name='Cam42' date='Dec 13 2005, 08:55 AM']Really? There is a thing called perfect act of contrition. If he did make a perfect act of confession, then he already did that. Unfortuntately the State of California decided it was better to kill him rather than continue to rehabilitate him. [right][snapback]823153[/snapback][/right] [/quote] No really? The whole point is that he isn't sorry, isn't repentant, and shows so through his own actions. If he was saved only moments before his death, God be praised. Yet all men still face judgment according to their actions. The whole point in being that he wasn't rehabilitated even after 26 years. If their was an ounce or remorse in the man the most liberal appeals court in the country would have seen to it that his sentence was commuted as they have in 133 other cases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Adam Posted December 13, 2005 Author Share Posted December 13, 2005 [quote name='Cam42' date='Dec 13 2005, 10:35 AM']And just how do you reconcile that viewpoint with the accepted Catholic catechetical teaching? And how would you answer the questions that I posed to toledo_jesus, in an informed and complete manner? Here is said teaching: (emphasis mine) [right][snapback]823228[/snapback][/right] [/quote] throwing toxic chemicals at prison guards not withstanding of course. right? And who ever said that just because someone is in prison means that they suddenly can have no influence is the one who is truly niave.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 [quote name='Brother Adam' date='Dec 13 2005, 10:44 AM']throwing toxic chemicals at prison guards not withstanding of course. right? And who ever said that just because someone is in prison means that they suddenly can have no influence is the one who is truly niave.... [right][snapback]823240[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Where are you getting that? I'd love to read the source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JP2Iloveyou Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 [quote name='Brother Adam' date='Dec 13 2005, 09:44 AM']And who ever said that just because someone is in prison means that they suddenly can have no influence is the one who is truly niave.... [right][snapback]823240[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Perhaps Williams did have influence while in prison. I don't know. What if his execution causes race riots in Los Angeles? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts