Do you think The death penalty Is Right?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Why is it off track? Because they were Freemasons, and deists, and believed in completely different ideals than the religious right agenda?
 
Dreadsox said:
OK...and examining their site, I would say that they, also pushing Bible Cd's to earn money, would have a reason for pumping the "Judeo-Christian" links to the constitution.

Ok look. I provided you with quotes from founding fathers. Are those quotes correct or not? Yes or no.

I don't care if that site had a big giant neon Cross flashing in the banner! It provided sound quotes from the founding fathers.

If you want to debate those quotes fine. But attacking the site from which they were pulled shows you are trying to go into another direction.

Your turn to find quotes from the founding fathers that said they didn't use the Bible to form American law.... over to you...
 
Dreadsox said:
Why is it off track? Because they were Freemasons, and deists, and believed in completely different ideals than the religious right agenda?

No because this thread is about the DEATH PENALTY!!!!!!!!!
 
all the items you posted were bits of writings and speechs

one may have been a law

it was laws we were talking about, right?



Quote:
Article. III.

Section. 1. The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

Section. 2. The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority; — to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls; — to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; — to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party; — to Controversies between two or more States; — between a State and Citizens of another State [Modified by Amendment XI]; — between Citizens of different States; — between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

Section. 3. Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.




so we could not have the above without

Quote:
Judeo-Christian Roots

"The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin." (Deut. 24: 6)
 
I take quotes, taken out of the context of the original document...

on a site that is pumping a religious agenda......

to be biased.....

yes.....

And I do not have the time to do the proper research, but do not fret...if I have the time tonight, I will be back if not....wednesday.
 
Dreadsox said:
I take quotes, taken out of the context of the original document...

on a site that is pumping a religious agenda......

to be biased.....

yes.....

And I do not have the time to do the proper research, but do not fret...if I have the time tonight, I will be back if not....wednesday.


Ok well I will seek out the original documents these quotes came from. You do the same. I have a feeling it isnt going to be pretty.
 
thacraic said:


You do not think that the

laws

of this country are not rooted in Judeo-Chrisitian belief?


I will ask again
what laws?


that site listed remarks

only one law
and there really was no connection.
 
Dreadsox said:


:ohmy:

Tone it down...:cute:

I wasnt being nasty! or angry!

Come on man. I was putting empahsis on the words death penalty because THAT (uh oh emphatic that) is what this thread is about and THAT is what for the last 10 post at least has not been addressed.
 
deep said:



I will ask again
what laws?


that site listed remarks

only one law
and there really was no connection.

OMG!

I showed you quotes from some of the founding fathers (which now is under attack because they are taken out of "context") having used the Bible as a guide in laying out law. What laws? All of them....

Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, George Washington... all these men said over and over what they used to form our laws. Is that a true statement yes or no?
 
thacraic said:



Ok well I will seek out the original documents these quotes came from. You do the same. I have a feeling it isnt going to be pretty.

Ok here is one link to the speech in its entirety from which this "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports..." quote was taken from

http://odur.let.rug.nl/~usa/P/gw1/speeches/gwfar.htm

I will do a John Adams search after I get the cornbread out of the oven and we all eat dinner. See ya later...
 
A speech is not a law.

I never question if any of them were of any religious faith or not.

All I question is when people say U. S. laws are based on Christian-Judeo values.

There are many elected legislators serving today that do not believe their personal religious beliefs have to codified in law.

So you really can't list any laws that are Christian- Judeo?
 
The Washington Speech has nothing to do with the constitution or law or the founding of our governement.
 
the constitution is law.

your site claims that it took these bible passages

Judeo-Christian Roots

"Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the stranger that is with him. Ye shall not respect [discriminate against] persons in judgment; but ye shall hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is God's: and the cause that is too hard for you, bring it unto me, and I will hear it." (Deuteronomy 1:16-17)

"Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect [discriminate against] the person of the poor, nor honor the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbor." (Leviticus 19:15)

"God is no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34)

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. (Galatians 3:28)


to convince the founding fathers they did not want a King after fight a war with King George III


"No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States" U.S. Constitution, Art. I, Sec. 9, Paragraph 8)


the site is nonsense and makes no real arguments

unless it is preaching to the choir
 
My goodness....I need to check myself out....I am agreeing with deep:wink:
 
One thing.....

John Adams, George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson did not create the law of the land.....

These guys did....

New Hampshire
John Langdon
Nicholas Gilman

Massachusetts
Rufus King
Nathaniel Gorham

Connecticut
Roger Sherman
William Samuel Johnson

New York
Alexander Hamilton

New Jersey
William Livingston
David Brearley
William Paterson
Jonathan Dayton Pennsylvania
Benjamin Franklin
Thomas Mifflin
Robert Morris
George Clymer
Thomas FitzSimons
Jared Ingersoll
Gouverneur Morris
James Wilson

Delaware
George Read
Gunning Bedford, Jr.
John Dickinson
Richard Bassett
Jacob Broom

Maryland
James McHenry
Daniel Carroll
Dan of St. Thomas Jenifer Virginia
John Blair
James Madison, Jr.

North Carolina
William Blount
Richard Dobbs Spaight
Hugh Williamson

South Carolina
John Rutledge
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney
Charles Pinckney
Pierce Butler

Georgia
William Few
Abraham Baldwin
 
My response to dread and deep are on the other thread that dread started. See yall over there to continue the debate. It is quite fun I think...
 
Dreadsox said:
One thing.....

John Adams, George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson did not create the law of the land.....

These guys did....

New Hampshire
John Langdon
Nicholas Gilman

Massachusetts
Rufus King
Nathaniel Gorham

Connecticut
Roger Sherman
William Samuel Johnson

New York
Alexander Hamilton

New Jersey
William Livingston
David Brearley
William Paterson
Jonathan Dayton

Pennsylvania
Benjamin Franklin
Thomas Mifflin
Robert Morris
George Clymer
Thomas FitzSimons
Jared Ingersoll
Gouverneur Morris
James Wilson

Delaware
George Read
Gunning Bedford, Jr.
John Dickinson
Richard Bassett
Jacob Broom

Maryland
James McHenry
Daniel Carroll
Dan of St. Thomas Jenifer Virginia
John Blair
James Madison, Jr.

North Carolina
William Blount
Richard Dobbs Spaight
Hugh Williamson

South Carolina
John Rutledge
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney
Charles Pinckney
Pierce Butler

Georgia
William Few
Abraham Baldwin

You forgot my state, and one of the most important of all :wink:

Virginia!!

James Madison
(still looking for official list to be sure!)

of course, those men can write whatever they want and, like the Bible, people will twist certain parts to say it said things it didn't really intend to suit their position :sigh:
 
Last edited:
Sorry to bump this thread back up but I thought I would make this point. If a man is sentenced for life after killing someone and then he kills someone in the prison. What can they do to him? He is already in jail and if there is no death penalty then what can be done to him. Basically this person would have a license to kill whoever he/she wanted to.
 
Speaking of which...

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...&e=1&u=/nm/20050321/us_nm/religion_death_dc_2

Catholic Bishops Campaign Against Death Penalty

2 hours, 25 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Catholic bishops on Monday launched a campaign against the death penalty and presented new data suggesting support for capital punishment among American Catholics had fallen sharply in recent years to below 50 percent.

Washington Archbishop Theodore McCarrick told a news conference the campaign would bring renewed urgency and energy to efforts to end capital punishment.

"The use of the death penalty ought to be abandoned because we have other alternative ways to protect society," he said.

Use of the death penalty has been falling in recent years. In 2004, 69 people were executed, the lowest number since 1997. So far this year, 12 people have been executed, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.

The number of people sentenced to death has also fallen from a 1996 high of 320 to 136 in 2004. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has outlawed executions imposed on juveniles and the mentally retarded.

Pollster John Zogby presented results of a survey taken last November showing that support for capital punishment among Catholics was down to 48 percent, with 47 percent now opposed. In 2001, 68 percent of Catholics support the death penalty while 27 percent were opposed.

"Frequent attendees of Mass as well as young Catholics are less likely to support the death penalty. And those who attended Catholic colleges also are more opposed," Zogby said.

A follow-up survey this month also revealed that 29 percent of Catholics had once favored the death penalty but had changed their minds.

Among the population at large, other polls have found support for the death penalty running at around 60 percent. However, when respondents are offered a choice between execution or life imprisonment without parole, support drops below 45 percent.

As part of their campaign, the bishops will increase education efforts in parishes, schools and universities and step up advocacy in Congress and state legislatures. They will also continue to submit legal briefs in death penalty cases.

McCarrick said the Catholic campaign fit into the church's general ideology of respect for life. "We cannot teach that killing is wrong by killing," he said. "This campaign brings together our social justice and pro-life efforts."

So what do all you "pro-life" folk think of this?

Melon
 
nbcrusader said:
I guess guilt/innocence plays no part in who we kill.......

dna evidence

corrupt law enforcement

back up your point.


it appears to be
that those convicted may be killed regardless of true guilt/innocence


So, are you coming over to opposing the death penalty?
 
i believe no human being should allow himself to kill someone else. the death penalty is wrong, killing a murder won't take back a lost life, killing a murder means to low down to his level, only god is the supreme judge. sometimes it gets very difficult to accept the bad things that happen, when for example a child is murdered or more people in series, if my brain would reason only for a second i wouldn't have any hesitation to go with the death penalty, but this is not the right way, you become a sort of "legal killer", and it's bad, too
 
Back
Top Bottom