Post by The Tipsy Broker on May 22, 2011 5:55:19 GMT -6
'Bert' opines (in one posting): ' There’s nothing wrong with being squeamish'.
That depends what one is being squeamish about. Being squeamish about the careful use of force and violence against guilty persons convicted in fair trials to defend peace, order and safety is quite different from being repelled (as so few are, but I am ) about blowing innocent German civilians to bits in their homes, or baking them to death in firestorms, because you can't make contact with the enemy's army.
Funny, in fact, that so many who are squeamish about the swift and humane execution of justly convicted killers are so relaxed about the mass murder, often by tearing them to pieces with metal instruments, of unborn babies, the bombing of Belgrade, Baghdad and Afghanistan (and now of Libya).
'Bert' continues: ' and just because you don’t think it’s right for the state to kill doesn’t mean that you don’t want to defend what is right.'
Well, yes it does, if you think it's fine for the state to kill, or license killing, for other purposes that suit you. Which is why people who support such policies always claim(though without explaining why) that the predictably lethal wars or predictably lethal transport policies they like are not in any way comparable to the existence of a death penalty. Not to mention the predictably lethal arming of the police, a direct consequence of the abolition of lawful execution in Britain.
And it also does if by disarming yourself you unleash much greater violence on those you are supposed to be protecting. And I have established here that greater violence has followed the abolition of the death penalty, something my emotional spasm opponents don't like discussing.
He then asks: ' As for your peroration, do you really think, in the cold light of day, that scrapping the death penalty is a “betrayal of civilisation”?'
Absolutely. The colder the light, the more I think it.
A civilisation that won't defend itself will soon cease to exist. QED.
'Curtis' submits :'What about John's gospel, 7.53-8.11? A crowd asks Jesus if a woman, just caught in adultery, should be executed, by stoning. This was the law in Jerusalem then Jesus stops the execution by saying ‘That one of you who is faultless shall throw the first stone.’ This passage makes me think that if Jesus were around today, he would oppose the death penalty, on the grounds that no one is good enough to execute anyone'.
(A note in brackets: This provides an illustration of how much we have lost thanks to the discarding of the Authorised Version of the Bible, in which the words are rendered so much more memorably as : 'He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her'. (How is this hard to understand as it is? Or archaic? It only contains two words of more than one syllable, and they are 'without' and 'among') )
The incident seems to me to be too specific, to the sin of adultery, to allow of this interpretation. Also, taken in company with Christ's behaviour before, during (and, as it happens, after) his own trial and execution, it cannot be used to make such a point. Without the latter, it might serve. With it, it does not. He intervenes to prevent an act of gross hypocrisy and (as so often in his life and ministry) to take the side of a woman against male hypocrisy or dislike. Not to object to the penalty as such ( had there been a sinless person there, that is to say anyone who had not committed adultery himself, Christ presumably could not have objected if he had cast the first stone).
Mr Walker runs away from the argument thus :'You yourself were the person who started the emotional side of this debate. All that nonsense about 'wielding the sword of civil society' etc. Sounds good but is not an argument'.
I didn't offer it as an argument. I have set out my argument in detail in articles findable through the index, and in the relevant chapter in my book, which Mr Walker ( despite my urgings) has chosen not to read , preferring to get het up and then flounce off. Like so many abolitionists, he prefers self-righteous emotionalism to a cool analysis of the practicalities. He is, perhaps, afraid of losing in such a contest. The phrase 'The Civil Sword' is just an expression, used by persons as various as John Milton and Andrew Jackson to refer to the state's monopoly of violence. If it upsets or otherwise unsettles Mr Walker, I cannot help it.
The person hiding behind the name 'Scaramanga' thinks he is being satirical when he is in fact just being boring.
Mr Charles writes: ' "Strict pacifists can use the risk of innocent death as an absolute reason for opposing execution (provided they also wish to ban private motor cars)." This utilitarian nonsense could've been written by Jeremy Bentham.'
Really? If I were to advance the perfectly good Christian arguments for a death penalty, namely the greatly heightened chance of genuine repentance and remorse on the part of the killer, not to mention the large number of murderers who commit suicide, which is gravely distressing to a believer, Mr Charles and others would jeer at me for superstition and mumbo-jumbo. So I stick to the things they can understand, which are measurable on a materialist calculating machine (however desiccated) and are equally true. But people who would jeer at a transcendental argument cannot really, in all consistency, also jeer at a utilitarian one.
He continues: 'PH exhibits a massive failure of imagination in regard to what capital punishment does to society as a whole.'
He should be more specific. I am not sure what imagination I need to deploy here. I have myself witnessed two executions in a foreign jurisdiction. I grew up in a society with a death penalty, and it was chiefly different from today's in being more peaceful and less violent, and having an unarmed police force.
He adds: 'I would HATE to live in a society that was ruled by retribution. I aspire to something better. I'd refer him to my earlier post on this thread if he wants clarification.'
I still don't see what's wrong with retribution forming part of a criminal justice system. Indeed, I can't see how it could function or long survive without it. And I suspect Mr Charles doesn't have my experience of seeing inside several prisons. I have no doubt that long-term imprisonment is immeasurably more cruel than swift execution. But 'ruled' by retribution? Hardly. Though the anarchy towards which we are heading, as justice fails, will be ruled by vengeance and blood-feuds.
And in 1921 theWEmpire was at its highest, it was 26% of the world over 500,000,000 people and at least 14 religions. It was an Empire where the sun never set/,and it ruled land,marks like the Pyramids, Gibraltar, Victorua Falls, Taj Mahal and Niagara Falls. But it was too expensive to own all the colonies so we left (never beaten) but a lot of them are still members of the British Commonwealth.
Tracy: Not losing interest,,,just busy with life. :-)
Sept 23, 2016 8:25:16 GMT -6
Potassium_Pixie: I fear what this means for Capital Punishment if most forums are circling the drain.
Sept 24, 2016 23:32:30 GMT -6
fuglyville: With 39, 35 and 28 executions for the last 3 years the DP trend is looking pretty good. If it continues this way, we may actually see the DP come to an end in a few years. Fear not, there's always other things to fight for.
Sept 27, 2016 11:40:11 GMT -6
Potassium_Pixie: Donald Trump is president. I hope he supports the DP and does whatever he can to keep it alive.
Nov 9, 2016 16:25:34 GMT -6
fuglyville: I hope the death penalty system dies peacefully as soon as possible, with or without his consent. The tide is definitely turning against it, but it needs to end - and it should have ended years ago.
Nov 23, 2016 18:08:49 GMT -6
whitediamonds: The DP is used criminally against innocents of society far too long & too many. They suffered death, not by peaceful means or methods. The DP needs as already stated to be kept alive.
Dec 30, 2016 10:58:11 GMT -6
starbux: @potassium_Pixie Hopefully DT will sign the death warrants for several inmates who have been waiting to get their needle
Mar 4, 2017 13:41:58 GMT -6
nykkic: I think I'm still opposed to the DP .. but at the same time I can see why it might be necessary for certain crimes.. I don't have to like it but I've come to respect it
Jun 7, 2017 15:35:38 GMT -6
john - uk: Merry Christmas everyone
Dec 22, 2017 7:17:56 GMT -6
arizonavet: It (the death penalty) has saved many lives of innocent people nykkic.
Apr 15, 2018 15:59:55 GMT -6
donji: If murderers would agree to murder humanly maybe we could work something out! If with malice and forethought you take a life you should forfit your life.
Aug 30, 2018 19:05:34 GMT -6
donji: Did he say the family of mr. trump!
Aug 30, 2018 19:07:34 GMT -6
donji: Saw the whole video i'm assuming the anti dp folks wanted to dramatize,and overstress the poor muderers pain.The only queston should be was the sentence carried out?
Aug 30, 2018 19:13:31 GMT -6