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.)

that would be an interesting case.

judge:what is your defence?

Jacob:well.....I saw them in the newspaper, I have cuttings and everything......they're pedifiles.

anyway to stop this from being spam. why wouldn't they be able to be rehabilitated? alchoholics can be rehabilitated and thats genetic.

Even for psychos who are beyond rehabilitation, you can't just kill them. Sweet Jesus, have some compassion!

*Jiggles*
 

Psycho' dont rape little children who are the age of 1 mth old - 16 yrs old do they? They just kill people. Paedophiles should be drown at birth if we ever get the technology to rehabilitate them. And alchoholism is quite easy to cure, so is drug addictions and sex addictions. Raping little children makes the vile creature who does it feel fulfilled in that sadistic way they do. It also makes them feel 'Loved' and wanted. My family actually kicked in a paedophile who lived down our street one time...it was quite amusing.

I'd call someone who rapes babies psychopathic!

If a pedophile can't control their urges, they should be locked up in a 4x4 cell and fed through a tube in their stomach. But I wouldn't say kill them, cuz then you're just a killer!

Yerrr...
 

But the cell thing would never happen. The killing thing would. Especially in Prison...anyone heard of that paedophile in America who got killed in prison...that amused me.

Chris, that's sick. You can't go around beating people up. Even the fact that they are paedophiles is not a good reason. Besides, if it is incurable, then it isn't their fault, is it? It seems that the whole "incurable" thing is both the crux and the downfall of your argument...

Basically, I believe that there is never any justification for killing another Human Being other than to prevent harm to others. And then only if there is no alternative.

Okay, since some of you guys think that the death penalty is bad and so is rap (which they are bad), what do you think about abortion? That's like killing a child also. People sometimes thinks that it's not bad but it is.

You've already posted a topic on this, so why bring it up here?

lol
 

Ok...if someone cannot be cured from something...and they are suffering. People would say "Kill them and put them out of their misery" Rite? Well...these creatures are incurable but they instead do harm to others, children. So...wouldn't it be better for society if they got killed off. And to the fact you called my family sick, the paedo who got attacked was prowling the neighbourhood and looking for little kids. He even approached me and gave me some money for no apparant reason, and that is basically why my family kicked the living crap out of him and forced him out of the neighbourhood. Most Paedophiles dont want to be cured n e way. They find it easier to chat up a child then a actual adult...which is true...but only because the child can be won over with money or puppys or kittens.

THIS was what I was saying was sick. Anyway, if there was a Paedophile prowling the neighbourhood, you don't beat them up, you report them to the police. Otherwise, you're just taking the law into your own hands, which is wrong.

Anyway, Paedophiles do not cause harm to children once they are imprisoned, and they do not cause harm to children once they are rehabilitated. The fact that they have not been is a fault with the prison system, it is not justification for killing them. If Paedophiles are reoffending, we should think "Why are they not rehabilitated?", and try and work out how to improve our prison system, instead of avoiding the issue by just killing them.

I still don't believe the incurable thing. Could you please tell me what newspapers ran stories on it? Just look on your cuttings, if you're not sure...

Um no, this comment was before I placed that topic yo.

Other neighbours did and the police said they couldn't do anything unless they had proof of the activity.

True...but Paedophiles do not get a proper sentence and are out within 5 years. The lowest sentence a Paedo has got was 2 months...not exactly justification and what are we...society...going to do when one of our children gets sexually molested? Ring the police so they can give another low sentence...i think not!!

I believe the Government around the countries have been trying to do that to no prevail. And anyway, why would you want to run the risk of one being near you. Say you have 3 children...and you know you have a "Rehabilitated" Paedo next door to you...would you be at ease? No parent would...there would always be "What if..." in the back of your mind...its best just to get them out of society. Try searching for what you want on search engines...like Google.com...thats a good engine.

1. I'm too lazy to quote anything

2. if you had no proof them why did you suspect him to be a peadofile

3. there was a paedofile in the area near us and he got about a 20 year jail sentance for looking at child porn not exactly five years and that wasn't molesting.

4. why would you know about your neibors backround anyway? it seems like they wouldn't want to talk about it

And you had no proof of his activity? Then how could you justify attacking him?

Like I say, if they're not getting long enough sentences, you don't kill them, you just give them longer sentences...

If they are rehabilitated (and I will believe that it is possible until I see evidence to the contrary), then the parents need not know. The majority of paedophiles who are released do not reoffend.

No offense, but I'd rather you told me what papers you read it in, so that I know you're not making it up...

Ok...
 

I dont really know were you live. So i cant judge. But if your from the UK, that is a blatant lie as Paedophiles can only get a maximum of 3 years FOR molesting. There was a new law set for 10 years but i do not think that is in progress and still it is not enough.

Danny...the paper was the Mirror.

If you read that properly i stated the POLICE needed actual proof of activity, everyone else already knew (If it was my fault through wording then sorry)



So...you would be happy to set a new law that if a Paedophile seems rehabilitated and he is next door to a family who has children of the age of 3-14 the parents need not know. Think of it this way, WHEN that creature attacks the kids then it will be on your concience. You should check the Richard and Judy site...that discussed it recently. And if you really want to know how disgusting these people are...they actually tune themselves into areas were children are. On Richard and Judy they were speaking to a police man who said that his colleges had arrested a Paedo and while he was been taken to the car he stopped and asked them if they heard that. The policeman replied 'What?' in which the paedo replied 'The school' it was later found out that a school was nearby but not in earshot...but because this man (If you can call him that) was so obsessed with children...he could tune himself into sounds of their laughing and playing. Sick.

Re: Ok...
 

Ta.

I knew what you meant. What I meant was: How can you be sure he was a paedophile if you have no proof? And if you had proof, why didn't you give it to the police?

I know the police aren't exactly the best they can be, but that's a problem with procedure, not actual law. The Death Penalty was a barbaric, medieval institution, and it is not the answer to current problems.

They (The neighbours) all had proof. He also led one of my friends to his house and nearly INTO his house, but one of the elderly neighbours got to my mate jus' in time. Everyone knew positivly that he was a Paedo but the police said for us to record the events and gave him a "Warning" which in the end never worked cos he approached me. And my family who said "We aint getting involved cos we mite put Chris at risk" suddenly went "We are getting involved cos Chris is at risk" and my 3 uncles (All Ex-Rugby players) caught up with him, chased him down the street and ended up beating the crap out of him...after that he left...problem solved. Even if the police had found evidence Paedos can actually get bail, and you say the law should give them longer sentences...well...yeh, sure they should. But will they...no. 3 years is not alot at all...and i am hoping that the law that states that people can gain access to the Sex offenders register is soon to be passed. Did anybody hear about that paedo ring that got busted...well...the policemen who were involved with that were sickened. They had to pretend that they were into child porn and trade images with the paedos which they said were very traumatic and disgusting images...in the end it involved a nation wide raid of all the Paedos from Germany to the US to the UK...and in the UK these are the sentences they got: They ranged from - 12 months - 30 months (2 and a half years that is i think)
Now the one who got 2.5 years actually raped a child LIVE on Webcam. And thats all that they got...jus' because they pleaded guilty. And even if they didn't...the max they could have got would be 3 years. On the documentary they did, they spoke to one who told the watchers what a Paedo' insentive was and he said it was something to do with the exitement and like i said before how easy it is to get a child than a woman. Looking at child porn is enough...but doing something like that LIVE on cam...is just sick and you do deserve to die for that.

Again, the short sentences isn't a problem with Law, but Procedure. Just because people aren't getting long enough sentences for a crime, doesn't mean they should be killed. If you're going to change the law (as all English Dealth Penalty supporters are), then why not just impose longer sentences?

Well...
 

Longer sentences!? They would still get out eventually wouldn't they...life is 15 years. And even if they did get longer sentences...you have the fact that they could escape...at least when they are dead they go to Hell...and then Lucifer sends them to the Primal Hell were the 2 previous Deaths are due to their misdemeaners (Spelt wrong...i know)