I think these things have already been said in this topic, but this is my opinion:
I think that people shouldn't play god (I don't believe in god and you know that.. so I'm not saying that god would be angry at us coz we're playing god or anythins.. What I'm saying is that we have no right to decide who lives and who dies.)
I think it's wrong to kill a person despite of the fact that he or she is a murderer or other dangerous criminal. Killing the criminals surely ensures that they will never commit any crimes again and that's a good thing, but killing a man surely isn't.
What comes to the "an eye for an eye"-opinion.. If someone kills and we decide to kill him we aren't any better persons than the killer. I also think that the criminals get off too easy if they are executed. They should be held in prison for the rest of their lives and suffer for the crimes that they committed.
Though life in prison doesn't really mean a life in prison.. :mad: If someone commits a terrible crime and he's convicted for life he can walk free after 14 years if he's been nice and stuff. Or if the president lets him go. That just sucks!
And Dan.. Here in Finland I would say that the prisons are luxurious. You have your own room and loads of furniture there and you've got tv and books and stuffs and you can study in there.. But you don't have your freedom. But to some people it doesn't really matter..
Oh yeah.. and now.. we've got these "prison" villages where the criminal mother or father can get a detached house where he or she can live with his/her children.. And they call that a prison..? zees..

Here's my thoughts. (not favoring or opposing anything) Someone has probably said this anyway, but...

Which is more humane? A quick slaughter? Or a foul, miserable life sentence in prison? One thing is for sure, in both cases the criminal dies in an unhumane way...

... I can feel the corrections coming on already...
*braces self*

Yeah it is appropiate when it's dealing with human beings. Aniamls have a soul but not spirits that's why we can't apply laws to them. It is inappropiate for a person to kill someone innocent. I just won't give then death, I would just leave it up to God and let him handle the murderer. He should go to prison but not killed really. How would you feel if someone killed your dad or your mother?

Sydney,
Not alot of people are going to follow what the bible commands to do in John 8:7. Some people are still going to do the death penalty and seek revenge on people who killed their loved ones. That's what makes it kinda sad.

It also states in Matthew 26:52-53: for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.

And in proverbs: What you reap is what you sow.

I don't think the discussion of Souls and Spirits really has any relevance here. For a start, how do you define a "soul" or a "spirit", and what's the difference? Secondly, what difference does it make if something has a soul? Surely if something doesn't have a soul, then it's even less right to kill it, because if you kill it, then it's gone, whereas with something that has a soul, at least there is some kind of continuity after death...

A big difference. A spirit and a soul are not the same. Also puhlease don't turn this into a conflict thing because I don't feel like arguing.

P.s, do you always wait until I reply and then you reply?

what i think,if you kill some one you should be in jail the rest of your life. if your binlanden than you should be killed

1. I was just asking what the difference was. Could you tell me what the difference is, please?

2. I wait until I have something to say. Then I post. Some other members (mentioning no names - and no, I'm not talking about you, Pinky) should take heed...

Is it possible those two passages are basically saying that in the end, you'll get what you deserve? I can't see how they can be interpretted as man being given the right to judge whether or not his fellow man is worthy of life. I could just as easily say it relates to karma, or if we're going to be literal about it, it could mean when you die, you are judged according to what you've done.

oooooooK
 

Death penalty. Yes...i do believe it should be active. Apart from those people who are all Islamic and want to blow up America and all cos basically thats what they want...is Death...hence the suicide missions. So they should face justice. Paedophiles should be used as test subjects in laboratories instead of animals. And people who have commited a mass murder should be killed etc. It would be a better place if stuff like that happened...i think

Hmmm...you ask a good question there Rettick. Well, I do think the death penalty is a little harsh because God says that he will be the one who judges when or not you die. Althought that could be Gods way of ending your life? But I would still have to say that I am against the death penalty, I mean don't you think living in jail for life would be much worse?:fuzblink:

Ah, I see you're back in circulation, Chris...

It is not unbiblical, you know the death penalty, listen up Romans 13 1-5 Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for their is no authority except that which has been established...2Consequently he who rebels against the authorites is rebelling against what god has instituted and those who do so will bring judgement on themselves3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority?then do what is right and he will commend you. For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is god's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is nesscesary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment, but also because of conscience

an article I found on a news site...as well as the connected message board along with it...FYI.

http://boards.abcnews.go.com/cgi/abc...s_deathpenalty

Tru dat.

Aslo in the old testiment, if you killed someone, God would of killed you. You were done. Were under the new covenant now because Christ died and cancelled out the old law.

Hunter Morrow, if you interpret that passage as declaring the death penalty to be okay, I can use it to justify a biblical acceptance of gay marriage, abortion and idol worship on the basis that the government makes it legal. That passage says nothing specific to capital punishment.

I thought this topic was going to be for debating the moral advantages and disadvantages of capital punishment rather than a Bible study session.

Then debate it then! No one's stoppin ya.

I've often thought the same of past threads, but it hasn't stopped you now, has it?

Posted by Surfacing:
Thats wise Surfacing.

He does not bear the sword for nothing is punishment. And no if the government told a christian to worship an idol or sin they do not have to do that. Some examples of this are the 3 men and thee firey furnace and when the apostles Paul and John would not listen to the authorities to stop preaching, paul said "We must obey God rather than men. If an appointed official sins it is not God's fault and it is not a christians duty to follow a sinful command. Capitol punishment is appropriate. Please list a suitable alternative to it that stops a person from ever commiting crimes and fully rehabilitates someone and I will stop supporting the death penalty. But if the alternative has so called Reformed rapists commmiting three more sex crimes and child molesters a whopping four more, than the alternative is not suitable

The thing is, that rapists thing was one case. Rehabilitation generally works, you just done hear about the success stories, because they "don't make good news"...

Call me naive (I am, after all, the Naivest Cynic you'll ever meet ;)), but I am generally inclined towards the idea of giving people a second chance. Should ten rapists who could be rehabilitated be killed just because one couldn't? I just don't think that is right. How could you know whether or not rehabilitation would work on a person if you just kill them, without giving them a chance?

ok, how do you people feel about brainwashing known criminals? I don't mean brainwashing them to become militia(ever read dune) I mean turning people into good citizens. this would probalby be a more agressive aproach to rehabilitation.

Mmmm...no
 

Personally i think rapists are bastards but then they do deserve a second chance if they do seem to be rehabilitated. However...paedophiles should jus' be shot/hung/poisoned/electrocuted/killed in some other way straight away. They dont deserve a second chance...and the amount of time they get in prison is ridiculous. It has also been proven that they cannot be rehabilited because it is in their mind set...so...screw 'em...have them burned or killed in another painful way...

Re: Mmmm...no
 

That can't possibly be true. How could they "prove" anything like that? Next they'll be saying Paedophilia is genetic or something...

Well...
 

Its because its a mind set...its basically a illness that affects the brain and they have recently found out that it cannot be cured. So...basically...KILL THEM...BURN THEM...MAIM THEM 1ST...and do lots of evil and sinister stuff to them...MUAHAHAHAHAHAAA...etc etc

Re: Well...
 

Can I ask where you got this information? Because, meaning no offense, I don't believe you...

Ok
 

Richard & Judy (On C4) and some newspapers. And its common knowledge that its a illness affecting the brain and that it cannot be stopped...all thats left is imprisonment which would be crap cos life is 15 yrs...so the next best thing is to kill them.

I don't suppose you can remember which newspapers? I'd be interested in reading about this...

Ermmm
 

I have cuttings of the reports cos they also put the paedophiles photo's on and i was going to keep them just incase i saw one so i could attack them with cause. I think it was in the Mirror but it was quite a while ago now. Check in your local library or sumat. The quotes are long but basically say there is no cure for paedophilia and that it can only be post-poned (Or sumat).

Re: Ermmm
 

I hope you were joking here...

What I meant was, what papers were they from? (So I can check those papers' websites for the info.)