Pope Declares Death Penalty Unacceptable in All Cases

What a way to go!

 

You got me there

 

The 10 Commandments are OT stuff that Jesus saved us from? Huh? So why all the Christian bitching about removing 10 commandments from government buildings? I was raised Catholic, and the 10 Commandments were still very much a big deal back then. Has it changed? I stopped religious type activities about 20 years ago.

 

That's funny coming from the very Church that used to torture and kill people.

The Pope should be more consistent and read-up on Church History.

Torture is a good thing in all cases.

Q.E.D.

 

Funny though that the Vatican has mis-numbered the original 12.

They combine #1 and #2 and then split out #10 into two.

I know I know.

 

Garden of Gethsemane -- been there.

 

To become an expert in Catholicism you must learn all the inconsistency between the Vatican pronouncements and the Bible.

I know I know.

 

Well this pope has championed condoms use and called for the church to be more tolerant towards gays and lesbians. Despite being atheist myself I'm quite fond of Pope Francis.

 

And the King will answer them, 'Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.' “Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
Sounds to me that Pope Francis is just more in line with the teachings of Jesus than the average Christian. I think that should be expected though.
Can you show evidence that the death penalty is a deterrent when it comes to violent crime? I can’t find any that backs that up.

I’m no Christian either, so whatever happens to public displays of the 10 Commandments isn’t a big deal to me, I just figure it best to meet people in their realm of experience. I guess the Christians among us ought to just base their views on the life of Jesus Christ. I think he’d be disappointed in most Christians today.

You can’t fault someone for trying to right the wrongs of their past.

Righting wrongs and all that...

 

You are seriously misinformed

Not even the crazy pope is against locking up criminals

And the legal system executing convicted murderers is not murder

 

I don't mind the death penalty for heinous crimes, 1st degree murder, repeat offenders of rapes or pedophilia.

What I've a problem with is those that advocate for the death penalty for lesser crimes or worst, as a way to save money.

 

Yesterday when I heard the pope had declared the death penalty to be a bad thing, my first thought was to wonder how many of the liberals on PF were suddenly going to "become Catholic!"

My second thought was to wonder if the liberals were also going to suddenly denounce abortion... because uh, "the pope."

 

I call that a position of convenience. He lives behind big walls, has security, and has a bullet proof pope-mobile. Us regular people may just want a potential murderer to think twice before killing us.

 

Well I said cage AND THEN murder. So I know that Pope Francis is not against prison. You got me on the definition of murder though. Execution doesn’t fit that term. I guess I’ll correct myself and say Kill Unjustafiably.

Death penalty is more expensive than keeping a person locked up for life. It saves no money. And killing people for heinous crimes implies we are a civilization that is incapable of housing criminals to serve out life sentences. Killing a person is only justifiable in war and self defense. Once a prisoner is in jail killing them is just revenge, and revenge isn’t justice.

I didn’t become Catholic, I just recognize when a religious person gets something right.

Well we can put our violent criminals behind big walls, under security, and bullet proof glass. We’re capable of that as an advanced society.
Do you have evidence that the death penalty is a deterrent to violent crime? I can’t find anything to back that up.

 

Deuteronomy 13:12-19 – If you hear it said about one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you to live in that wicked men have arisen among you and have led the people of their town astray, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods you have not known), then you must inquire, probe and investigate it thoroughly. And if it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done among you, you must certainly put to the sword all who live in that town. Destroy it completely, both its people and its livestock.

1 Samuel 15 Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.

In Deut 2 God intentionally hardens King Sihon's heart so they will not let the Israelite's pass.

Deut 2 When Sihon and all his army came out to meet us in battle at Jahaz, 33 the Lord our God delivered him over to us and we struck him down, together with his sons and his whole army. 34 At that time we took all his towns and completely destroyed[c] them—men, women and children. We left no survivors.

The difference between these examples and the previous is that God makes a law telling the Israelite's that children are not to be killed for the crimes of their parents. God then orders children and babies to be killed - For the crimes of their parents.

In the passages above (and there are numerous others) God is depicted as an irrational flip flopping xenophobic genocidal maniac. The Israelite's are the "chosen people" and are not to interbreed with "foreigners" ... except on occasion when God allowed some virgin women to be kept as sex slaves.

Numbers 31: “Have you allowed all the women to live?” he asked them. 16 “They were the ones who followed Balaam’s advice and enticed the Israelites to be unfaithful to the Lord in the Peor incident, so that a plague struck the Lord’s people. 17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man..

What is interesting about this whole - "don't worship other Gods" narrative is that the Israelite's actually spend very little time worshiping YHWH and a whole lot of time worshiping other Gods.. throughout this whole time period - throughout their history actually until the destruction of the Temple.

Moses leaves for a brief time to go up the mountain and spend some time with God. What do the people do ? - Led by Aaron (Brother of Moses) they make the Golden Calf ... for the worship of El and Asherah. Kind of odd don't you think ? I mean these were the people that actually witnessed all the "miracles". It is one thing to believe without evidence - quite another to have seen the miracles with your own eyes.

Then .. God follows the Israelite's around for years in the "Tent of the Lords Presence" supposedly there is a cloud that hovers over the tent during the day and a radiant glow at night.


Joshua 24: 2 Joshua said to all the people, “This is what the Lord, the God of Israel, says: ‘Long ago your ancestors, including Terah the father of Abraham and Nahor, lived beyond the Euphrates River and worshiped other gods....

14 “Now fear the Lord and serve him with all faithfulness. Throw away the gods your ancestors worshiped beyond the Euphrates River and in Egypt, and serve the Lord 15 But if serving the Lord seems undesirable to you, then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your ancestors served beyond the Euphrates, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you are living. But as for me and my household, we will serve the Lord.”

OK .. so the Abraham's dad and the ancestors were worshiping other Gods .. then in Egypt they were worshiping other Gods - hence the Golden Calf incident.

Now Joshua tells us that after the calf incident (even with God following them around prior to going into the Promised land - Joshua himself was one of the few allowed to go into the Tent) the people were still worshiping other Gods. This is not making sense ? ... especially given the law above Deut 13.

Now .. instead of "kill everyone in towns worshiping other Gods" - and the main justification for mass genocide described above was because of the worship of other Gods - Joshua is giving the people a choice ! Well fancy that !!

Joshua dies shortly after and what to the Israelite's do ? You guessed it .. worship other Gods ! This continues all the way down to the Time of Solomon (along with child sacrifice and all that other good stuff).

King Solomon "wise king that he was .. a king that had actually conversed directly with God" The idea of not intermarrying was long forgotten.

1 Kings 11: King Solomon, however, loved many foreign women besides Pharaoh’s daughter—Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Sidonians and Hittites. 2 They were from nations about which the Lord had told the Israelites, “You must not intermarry with them, because they will surely turn your hearts after their gods.” Nevertheless, Solomon held fast to them in love. 3 He had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines, and his wives led him astray. 4 As Solomon grew old, his wives turned his heart after other gods, and his heart was not fully devoted to the Lord his God, as the heart of David his father had been. 5 He followed Ashtoreth the goddess of the Sidonians, and Molek the detestable god of the Ammonites.

Seriously .. this wisest of kings who has actually talked to God .. allows his Concubines and wives to turn him from the God that gave him everything. Does this pass the giggle test ? The worship of other Gods and child sacrifice continues. "Molek" and "Chemosh" are child sacrifice Gods.

On a hill east of Jerusalem, Solomon built a high place for Chemosh the detestable god of Moab, and for Molek the detestable god of the Ammonites. 8 He did the same for all his foreign wives, who burned incense and offered sacrifices to their gods.

OK then .. not much YHWH worship going on. By the time we get to Elijah - many years later - Elijah tells us that he is the only prophet left of YHWH and then relates that there are 450 for Baal and 400 for Asherah.

The centuries pass buy - not much YHWH worship. Then .. miraculously .. around 650 BC Josiah finds the "book of the Law". Well .. howdy doodles. How long was it lost for ? We are not told .. centuries no doubt if the thing ever existed in the first place.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josiah

Josiah then goes about killing so called "Pagan" priests (anyone who did not agree with him) in an effort to standardize a new version of an old and long forgotten religion to consolidate his power.

Shortly after the Babylonians destroy Israel and the Temple and that is that. Not much YHWH worship going on

How a new religion formed after the Babylonian captivity under Persia is a story for another day.

 

It is not possible to know of a case where one decided not to commit murder. Many believe that we should not be putting murderers to death and I respect their opinion. I do not, however, respect the opinion of the pope for the reasons I mentioned.

 

Give your pity to a wicked and you're cruel to an innocent.

Pope Francis think he his charitable, but he is only cruel to innicent people.

Countries which renounce to death penalty always went into a judicial laxism.

Furthermore, he is unable to have led his catholic congregation to get ridd of the cartels. Instead of putting his tongue on the feet of illegal migrants or using it to defend criminals, maybe he should fight for the life of all the catholics who dies because of the cartels.

 

First of all, Jesus talked in parables.
Second, God is a moron if he wants to torture people in hell forever. But he doesn't.
Third, popes didn't have problems with the death penalty for a millennium, now of a sudden they have?
Forth, what's better than sending people directly to God, so he can judge them?
Fifth, punishments, including executions, have no meaning as a revenge. Revenge doesn't bring back the dead. They only have meaning as a warning for those who want to follow the same path. For example, if we Europeans were to cut migrants heads and stick'em on poles, there wouldn't be swarms of Africans invading with boats and doing what they whim.

 

And you realize that "right" is nothing more than your opinion? I would guess that on many, if not most, things, you disagree with the pope. So to suddenly use him as an authority to verify that you are right is disingenuous.

 

Insofar as it applies to the death penalty, it could go either way. However 'no murder' allows for defensive lethality, whereas 'no killing' does not. I suspect that Jesus would advocate taking all measure to defend yourself and your neighbor without killing, but when killing is necessary to that end, I think he would support it. Even in the NT, there is precedent for acceptable violence in the protection of the innocent.

Personally, I doubt Jesus would support the death penalty. However, it is ostensibly done in the interest of protecting society from murderous criminals, so theres debate to be had on the issue.

 

Why respect the opinions of some, but not of others simply for sake of their circumstances? Do you hold the same criticism of people who live in gated communities and are wealthy?

Plenty of studies have shown that executions of criminals seldom brings closure to any victims of violent crime. So how does not executing criminals locked away from society bring anyone harm? You have proof of lax judicial practices for every country that has ever done away with the death penalty? I’d love to see that. Empathy and humanity is not a zero sum game.

I’ll answer each point by line. Breaking up quotes is a pain on the phone.

1st: And?
2nd: God’s punishment for the wicked is for him to decide and religious people shouldn’t be so eager to offer judgement.
3rd: Nothing wrong with addressing the sins of your past.
4th: They’ll get there, as will we all, it is not for us to decide when someone meets their maker (or more likely just ceases to be).
5th: Feel free to provide any evidence that the death penalty is an effective deterrent to violent crime. And are you advocating for the indiscriminate killing of immigrants? How noble of you.

Right and wrong is often a matter of opinion, so saying such as some kind of proof of your argument is like claiming the sky is blue and therefore you are right in the very same argument. What I disagree with Pope Francis on is immaterial to the current discussion. I do not believe I am right because the Pope agrees with my view. I believe I am right because of what my moral compass tells me is right. If the Pope is wrong I will disagree with him issue by issue. I don’t have to hate him or discredit him because we disagree on one matter or another.

This implies we are a society incapable of housing criminals to serve out life sentences in a humain and dignified manner. If we were not able to do such then killing criminals might be justified, but we are able and therefore killing criminals is unjustifiable once they are safely secured in a prison facility appropriate for their crime committed. If we are able then we must.

 

You should start by trying to convince me that living out ones life in tiny box is 'humane' or 'dignified'...

 

Are you arguing that we need prison reform? Because I agree with that. If you’re arguing that it’s better to kill a person instead of trying to find a better way, well I feel that is lazy and immoral. It’s a problem worth solving.

 

I changed my position on this issue. I used to feel that a murderer deserved death. But after thinking and reading about some information about trials and juries, I had a change of heart.

The justice system, while not horrible, is slanted towards the privileged. The wealthy can afford the top attorneys to defend them while the poor wind up with public defenders. People who are privileged can usually bail themselves out. People who can't get bailed out are at a huge statistical disadvantage and far more likely to be convicted.
https://www.revealnews.org/blog/cant-post-bail-jail-before-trial-increases-odds-of-conviction/

Then there's also the possibility of the jury being biased or making mistakes. Some jurors are racists but look and appear normal during the jury vetting. It's clear that our country still has many racial issues. Even with jury vetting, a person on trial may not be receiving a fair trial even if it appears to be fair on the surface.

For those reasons and a few others, I am ok with not executing people.

 

No!

It does not.

It says, "Thou shalt not murder".
You kill the enemy
You murder your neighbor.

Look at a Bible that goes directly from ancient Hebrew
to Modern English.


And the first line should be, "When the Lord began to create . . . "
Not "In the beginning".


@DennisTate
As the resident dean of esoteric Bible study,
what say you?


Moi

​