When I say Bible, just assume I'm talking about the Christianity's New Testament, not the Old. The New wouldn't approve of this barbric ritual, no debate needed.
"The State"? Really? That's the perfect defense for the coward who kill another human being, it wasn't me, it was "the state"
America needs to follow the rest of the world, almost two thirds of the countries of the world have abolished the death penalty, and there were almost 60 that had the death penalty in law or practice, but didn't use it.
We abolished the death penalty a long time ago, even for treason.
"The death penalty is the ultimate denial of human rights. It is the premeditated and cold-blooded killing of a human being by the state. This cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment is done in the name of justice."
I couldn't agree more. Everyone has the right to life, not just by what I believe in, but by European Law, and the Law set by United Nation's Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
"Everyone has the right to life"
Saudi Arabia still crucify people, don't tell me that isn't sick. The whole thing's sick.
Oh please Toby. The U.N is one of the most hypocritical institutions ever. Not to mention that it's only used as a pretense for military action against nations that don't play ball with the US.
EDIT: On a slightly unrelated note, your naivety is quite amusing. Oh, and you are right. The way they execute the execution (hehe) is cowardly. If you wish death upon another do it yourself or shut the **** up.
OK, I was merely stating that it is technically against International Law.
I firmly believe the Death Penalty is cold-blooded murder. Say whatever you wan't. *Shrugs*
Thou shalt not kill.
Wow. Some Christians favor the death penalty, some Muslims would love to hold you down while they sever your head just because you're American.
Is that true Islam?
I look at the Bible and see the facts, I don't do what you're doing.
No, you're wrong. I don't want to turn this into an pathetic argument, but you're wrong.
Everyone deserves to maintain there God given right to life, no matter what they've done, the nature of the crime, the charachteristics of the offender, or the method of execution used the "The State".
It's a cowardly practice, used by cowards, and enforced on cowards, by cowards. Cowards. :D
Well, Find me any passage of the New Testament that condones cold-blooded killing of criminals.
I don't want to argue, just debate. :)
Toby, i really need to ask you this. Are you aware that the bible is not supposed to be read word from word and taken as such but instead, it's supposed to be a collection of stories that try to show you widsom, not to tell you how to live your life?
Argue that with the 2,000,000,000,000 of us living our life by the Bible.
Don't try and tell me anything about the Bible. ;)
You still didn't answer the question. I was not arguing with anything, why such response? I merely asked you a simple question.
And I answered... :
I did answer.
And Unknown -
"Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? … I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign Lord."
That's proof the Bible (New Testament) is against the death penalty. But I don't expect a reply from you as I haven't got one previously, Ill just assume you've admitted you were wrong. You can't really argue anything now.
And, I did answer the question.
The Bible does tell you how to live your life, it sets rules and guidelines for humanity to follow. What a stupid question.
Wow, you obviously put some time into writing that, so thank you.
If someone condoned the death penalty then they'd take pleasure in knowing an evil individual was dead.
I think the death penalty is cold-blooded murder by another name, I do so because I believe, and millions do also, that the teachings of Christianity are against the death penalty. I also believe morally the death penalty is unjust.
I can condone the death penalty without taking pleasure in the death of any one criminal.
You argue without reason and employ no logic.
I stated earlier, I neither condone nor condemn the death penalty. It is what it is - a tool of human governments in place since the dawn of recorded law and probably earlier.
Innocent people are trampled on every day. Do I wish this were not the case? Yes. Emphatically so. Do I think there is any way to avoid it ever happening on a wholesale scale? No. It is the nature of life.
Had you wanted to rebut my arguments, you should rather have argued with me than petulantly insisting that I must be wrong because I don't think like you. Show me I'm wrong with reason.
For example, all you needed to argue the point was to say, as the Catholics do, that even though the Bible gave us capital punishment, we now exist in a time and place where alternatives to the death penalty are available (life in prison, for example) and so must not necessarily employ the heinous act of state death but rather are liberated by the ability to incarcerate. You might have said that the overwhelming evidence that racism, classism, and economics evident in the death penalty system have voided any government's right to use it because it cannot be charitably and equally applied to all citizens. You might even have said that since the Bible remains effectively silent on the subject in the New Testament, neither specifically condoning nor condemning the right of the state to use capital punishment, that we as Christians are free to make up our own minds on the subject - considering what we know of free will, morality, and God's love in our decisions - and that either decision is correct and so should be decided democratically within a society.
But you didn't. You couldn't, could you? That would require thinking. It's so much easier just to condemn me and stand firm in your childish beliefs. Childish not because of what they are, but childish because of your level of understanding about them. But that is faith for you - a childish belief in the absurd.
I'lll chip in with some wisdom for you! "there is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt".
EDIT:Hahahahah, you have no clue whatsoever what unknown said so you reply with *yawn*.
Ok, if anyone is re reading through what I wrote, replace innocent with "not that guilty - much".
I rather think he missed the point where I proved the death penalty was wrong, even.
A man got a new hunting dog, and went out to shoot ducks. He shoots a duck, and it falls in a lake. His dog walks across the water, retrieves the duck, and brings it back to him. Shocked that his dog can walk on water, he shoots another duck, and again, the dog walks across the lake to retrieve it.
The next day, he asks a buddy to go hunting with him, wanting him to see what his dog can do. Shortly after arriving near the lake, he shoots a duck. The dog walks across the waters of the lake, and retrieves the duck. He shoots several more ducks, and several more times the dog walks across water to retrieve them. The buddy never says a thing about this dog.
Finally able to stand it no longer, the man asks his friend, "Don't you think there is something unusual about my dog?"
The friend replies, "Sure do. He can't swim."
No, the fact that one needs to use "The State" as a defence, means that they're a coward.
They're the worst type of human being, one consumed by evil.