If State Executions Are Carried Out In Our Name, Is There Blood On Our Hands ??

Technicaly WE are actualy the state.

No, the state exists separately from its citizens. In the West, we have a vote, and thus a "voice" in how the state conducts its business. But that is not the same as running the operation.

Some states do purport to act on behalf of "the people." This is, no doubt, as scrupulously honest as all the other things which politicians say in the course of a day.

the cause of death is Homicide !! And as we know, homicide by any other name is Murder !!!

No, murder is a specific kind of homicide. There are many other kinds, including those in the category "justified." The machinery of state decides which homicides are murders (or manslaughters. or suicides, ... , or justified).

but how many of these men were innocent ???

That's not the standard. Who among us, after all, is innocent? How many of these people (women have been executed as well) were not guilty of the crime for which they were executed? is the question. There is every reason to think the answer is quite a few.

Are there such things as mortal sin's that cannot be forgiven ??

If you are asking specifically about Catholic doctrine, the answer is no. The scope of absolution is unrestricted in Catholic canons.

The counterargument often presented (that Jesus said blaspheming the Holy Spirit is unforgivable) in unavailing, for several reasons. Since I am not Catholic, I am disinclined to debate the point. I am simply reporting the Catholic view.

Even if you are not religious, what is your stance on this subject ??

I am generally opposed to a civilian death penalty. However, there are examples like New Hampshire, which has a death penalty that may be imposed for very few crimes, and which has not been exacted for more than 70 years.

I suppose if there must be one, then that would be the kind to have.

Thank you guys for your thoughts on wether the death penalty is neccesary, .....

but the question still remains, are we partly responsible for it ??

especialy for you religious folks, ... if a sin is carried out in your name, is it still a sin ??


I think capital punishment is barbaric, and a reminder of our primitive ways. There is no redemption in revenge.

reply to post by defcon5



Here are some quotes regarding Romans 13.

Often times the bible does not give context to the words.


It appears the letter was to make Paul seem friendly to the ruling body of Rome, If apostle Paul was advocating obedience to secular authorities, then Caesar would have no cause against him. Why would Caesar have Paul beheaded if he was promoting obedience to Rome?

The world loves its own. If Paul belonged to Caesar, Caesar would not want to kill his own. If Paul was promoting "be subject to Caesar," then Paul would be Caesar's friend. You would not kill your own. You don't destroy the very instrument that advertises for you.

Romans 13 is probably the most devastating thing to a Christian in the hands of the ungodly. It sounds so convincing to obey those who appear to be in power. For too long, secular governments have used Romans 13 as a club to beat Christians into obedience to them. Just because a group maintains power through their guns and jails, does not mean God put them there.

God said there are powers not ordained by Him at Hosea 8:4, "They have set up kings, but not by me: they have made princes, and I knew it not."

and was not Paul himself beheaded by the powers that be ??? Would you allow yourself to be executed if a law was passed tommorrow which demanded it ??? We should not hold the law so highly just becuase a bible passage is out of context.


romans13.embassyofheaven.com...

Originally posted by defcon5
reply to post by AUSceptic

 

Jesus did not say they could not stone her under the law, did he?
You missed the point of that story:

When the Pharisees brought a woman who was caught in the act of adultery to Jesus and asked Him if she should be stoned, Jesus replied, “If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her” (John 8:7). This should not be used to indicate that Jesus rejected capital punishment in all instances. Jesus was simply exposing the hypocrisy of the Pharisees. The Pharisees wanted to trick Jesus into breaking the Old Testament law; they did not truly care about the woman being stoned (where was the man who was caught in adultery?) God is the One who instituted capital punishment: “Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed, for in the image of God He made man” (Genesis 9:6). Jesus would support capital punishment in some instances. Jesus also demonstrated grace when capital punishment was due (John 8:1-11).

I didn't miss the point at all. Jesus said to follow the countries laws, which at that point in time included capital punishment.
The Bibly also says we should try to be like God, God is forgiving, therefore we should be forgiving. Admittedly, sometimes that can be extremely hard for an individual to forgive another individual who has sinned against them. I myself struggle with fogiveness.
I find your justification of capital punishment using the Old Testament quite interesting because the New Testament provides a completely new covenant. Otherwise we would be killing gays, stoning prostitutes, sacrificing lambs etc.

Originally posted by pikypiky
Luke 6:31 (KJV)

And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.

While I'm a firm believer in `free will`, there are bad eggs out there that need to be discarded and when those who harm others and take away the `free will` to live peacefully they need to be executed.

For those requiring imagery: Is eating rotten eggs just as good as enjoying the good ones? I don't think so! Thank you.

[edit on 2010-6-10 by pikypiky]

So rapists should be raped, murderes should be murdered?
What about the drunk driver who runs someone over? Should he also be run over by a drunk driver?
How far do you go? If the victims death was long and painful, should the accused also suffer a long painful death?
Should a battered wife be killed for finally snapping and killing her abusive husband?
An eye for an eye and soon the whole world is blind.

Originally posted by defcon5

Originally posted by AUSceptic
I find your justification of capital punishment using the Old Testament quite interesting because the New Testament provides a completely new covenant. Otherwise we would be killing gays, stoning prostitutes, sacrificing lambs etc.

I do not believe that I used the old testament at all?

I posted a quote from Paul written in the Romans. However there are tons of Old Testament verses that not only command capital punishment, but also lists of crimes that God commands it for.
According to Christ those old testament rules still applied:

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. - Matthew 5:17

Because of Christ’s sacrifice mans sin would be absolved by God in the afterlife, but that does not excuse a man from paying the human penalty for his crimes during his life here on Earth.

Originally posted by IntastellaBurst
It appears the letter was to make Paul seem friendly to the ruling body of Rome, If apostle Paul was advocating obedience to secular authorities, then Caesar would have no cause against him. Why would Caesar have Paul beheaded if he was promoting obedience to Rome?

They said to Him, "Caesar's." Then He said to them, "Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God the things that are God's." - Matthew 22:21

That is Christ speaking in that quote BTW, sounds almost exactly the same as what Paul was saying.

You quoted from Genesis, the Old Testament.

"I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law." Galatians 5:3 Paul certainly seemed to think that the laws of the Old Testament no longer applied unless a person circumcised themself and therefore accepted the old covenant.

Capital punishment is wrong. Remember if just one innocent guy gets executed, that will be enough for all the people involved for his death for negative influences for their subsequent births. I dont even think death for innocent people wrongly accused will be that painful as compared to the following,
1) They themselves knowing that they did not commit the crime but expecting their death in a certain number of days or months.
2)Repeatedly appealing which follows in vain
3)Seeing his kid or baby and knowing that he wont be there when he grows up, when his child gets married, to have grandchildren and to have peace in old age.
4)Think about the pain of the members of innocent family members thinking about their dad/mom/brother/sister/son/daughter or whatever relation,,, the pain they go through because of their inability their innocent relative from death and the reasons not to do this are countless
Our law is not God's law,, we need some major reforms for the betterment of our society. I dont think tit for tat is one. It never ends. Also its risky because of the above said possibilities of innocent people getting framed. Capital punishment is never going to do any positive change for the society.

Just see around our society. Capital punishment has been around for a very long time. Do you see any positive change or the crime decreasing?

edit:Several mistakes of spelling and grammar as English is not my first language.

[edit on 10-6-2010 by chaosinorder]

Is their blood on our hands? I like to think it is. We willfully pay taxes which go to fund these executions. I think that it means we (at least in this thread that realize it) now have blood on our hands. The same goes for, abortion, wars, etc. But lets not forget, we as humans are typically violent. I personally feel that I support the above listed by paying taxes and although I feel this way, I will continue to pay taxes.

On this subject, I would actually be against the death penalty if prisons were way more tough than there current conditions. A murderer, rapist, pedophile, or any other nasty committing the "Ultraviolence" and got really hard time for the rest of there lives would satisfy me way more than the easy way out.

Originally posted by defcon5
reply to post by AUSceptic

 

I didn’t quote from genesis, the external article that I linked you too quoted genesis.
What difference does that make anyway, its all part of the bible, and Christ stated that he did not come here to “change the law, but fulfill it.”

Well, my mistake regarding the Genesis quote.
I'm not sure where your coming from, are you a Christian?

I wonder, .... if we are against capital punishment, wars, law enforcement, .... and all of the other things are taxes are used for, .... is that enough grounds to stop paying taxes and get away with it ???


misapropriation of funds !!!!

Originally posted by IntastellaBurst




I wonder, .... if we are against capital punishment, wars, law enforcement, .... and all of the other things are taxes are used for, .... is that enough grounds to stop paying taxes and get away with it ???


misapropriation of funds !!!!

Don't you have a constitutional right to bear arms and form militia groups to rise up against a tyrant? ... I'm just saying...

This debate is predicated partially on a misunderstanding of the word, "homicide."

Not all homicides are murders.

www.merriam-webster.com...

www.merriam-webster.com...

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by AUSceptic



We have rights to bear weapons, ... but if we were to form milita's we would be labeled terrorists, ... hunted down and locked up, ... dont ya think ???

sorry for the late reply.