ELEPHANT-DONKEY.com

Since I'm on the fence with capital punishment, I'm looking forward to this one.

Antioxidant Overdose | 03/03/08

In the bible we see an interesting quote in which reads "Let yea without sin cast the first stone". In other words, contrary to the law of Moses which Obamaman08 has quoted with saying an eye for an eye and such, no one should take another's life. That is absolutely correct. Jesus is making a distinction that the pharasees have no right to prosecute the harlot for adultry, for they have committed adultry as well, and are following her out of there own hearts, and not the law of Moses. That is the Key. When a police officer arrests you for murder, does he have a right to? You may be tried with the death penality! He is just as much as a sinner as you are. He shouldn't have the right. However, it is not the officer as the person, but the officer as a position/title that arrests you. The officer himself is falliable but his position, whom he has sworn under oath to defend with honor, is infalliable and it is under such that he arrests you. If he arrests you out of person, its usually called unlawful prejudice or profiling, both which is caught and taken care off quite quickly. This is what Jesus is pointing at when condemning the pharasees. There is a few percentage of the cases, atleast nowdays, that get by on this technicallity, but when discovered, are sweftly dealt with. Believe it or not the government is not out to get you, it has deeper problems. To sum this up, when a judge condemns you to death, the person didn't condemn, it's the office of judge that did.

Jvjrz | 03/03/08

I like a scene in the show the West Wing in which a priest comes to the president and asks how he should refer to the president by, his first name, Jeb, or his office, Mr. President. Ironically they are also talking about capital punishment, but since the producers and the show faux administration treads on liberalsm, the show votes against capital punishment. I see it a different way, however. Anywho, the president says, call me Mr. President, not Jeb. You understand why, he goes on. 'It's not that it's an ego thing, it's just that when I have to make decision of sending troops in harm's way or which deadly disease to fund the most this year, I tend to think of myself as the office, the president of the U.S. and not Jeb Bartlett." The quote is amazing because it's obvious to us the viewers that if it was Jeb Bartlett and not the President making the decision, Jeb would probably rule on bais, as well as crack under pressure. Reasurred by his position though that holds great honor, Jeb assumes a different role of another person all together, the President of the United States, and with that authority he now makes a decision he could not do alone.

Jvjrz | 03/03/08

Capital punishment is a terrible thing, I will agree with you, but it must hold place. It is our best interest in society to not have murders wondering the streets, nor financially support murders in prison with our tax dollars. Seeing that there is no way to permanantly exile a person from a country anymore (if drugs and illegals can cross, you bet they can to) there is no other option. Believe me I hate to let a person go from a christian perspective, but even Yahweh Elohim (through his office God)still kills people, though it grives him to have to take the life of his children. As long as Judges act as Judges (their office)and not the person (which they shouldn't anyway since they swore underoath to uphold their position)then I see Capital Punishment being completely legitament.

Jvjrz | 03/03/08

As for guantanamo, the terrorist their do not get the best treatment from the United States, they are prosecuted, and they are convicted of murder if so proven guilty, and then executed. Now please read my arguement I posted above in the debate boxes.

Jvjrz | 03/03/08

The reasons I agree or not agree with the death penalty have nothing to do with religion. When it's proven, I support capital punishment. If it's not proven, I don't agree with the punishment. Mental cases go case by case.

Antioxidant Overdose | 03/03/08

Capital punishment is simply lowering one self to the level of the murderer. It seems quite hypocritical to kill someone because they killed someone. It follows the childish eye for an eye logic.

ColoradoJ | 03/03/08

Did you not read my arguement ColoradoJ or did you vote just because you already had your mind made up? I think you'd be persuaded differently had you read my arguement. Antioxident Overdose, I agree completely. Nevertheless, let's both agree that capital punishments needs to be put in place for those that are proven guilty are guilty, and did so with full knowledge and a cold heart. My arguement is to justify capital punishment in such a case.

Jvjrz | 03/04/08

Guantanamo has been proven to have housed many Arab prisoners who were not radical Islamic jihadists. That was one of the original problems with the place. they just rounded people up and threw them in. It might be better, now. But, there is no denying we weren't too selective in who we threw into Guantanimo. The Geneva Convention was a contract we signed. There was no clause in it that said "unless we don't feel like it" or "depending on who it is". It is a moral obligation. The statistics on how many death row inmates were later proved innocent is staggering. The simple fact is we quite often get it wrong. It is also a fact crimes against white people earn the death penalty at a much higher rate than crimes against minorities. This shows a hint of racism still in the system which shouldn't be used to decide who does or does not deserve the death penalty.

Eveas | 03/04/08

Ok, I'm sorry, but neither of you make a decent argument for or against. The person for capital punishment said 'Because these are radical jihadists, their lives mean nothing', and it's that kind of attitude that led to many of our current foreign relations issues. The person against said 'even though they killed an innocent person they deserve to be treated humaely like any other individual', and that shows a lack of understanding of what some of these people in question have done-the chronic rapist that painfully and slowly killed their victims, the 12 year-old that shot his parents, the person that commited many hate crimes of a horrible nature, ruining lives and businesses forever. What both of you have failed to address is that a life sentence without the chance for parole, the logical alternative to the death sentence, is a terrible punishment on every level-instinctual (humans were born to be free), psychological (they will NEVER see the things(and some of the people) they care about EVER AGAIN), physical (they will never enjoy the things they like to do outside, for example). This is a much worse punishment than simply killing them, especially since the way they are killed is slowly moving towards maximally humane-lethal injection, electric chair, things designed to stop the criminal from feeling anything before their life ends.

Zomgoose | 03/04/08

Also, I'd like to add that the Geneva Convention argument only deals with a small part of this issue. Besides, it is in the United States' deepest interests (politically) that the Guantanamo Bay inmates are not killed injustly, or really at all.

Zomgoose | 03/04/08