In Love With Death

[Tigermike 3,048]

In Love With Death

The bizarre passion of the pull-the-tube people.

Thursday, March 24, 2005 12:01 a.m. EST

God made the world or he didn't.

God made you or he didn't.

If he did, your little human life is, and has been, touched by the divine. If this is true, it would be true of all humans, not only some. And so--again, if it is true--each human life is precious, of infinite value, worthy of great respect.

Most--not all, but probably most--of those who support Terri Schiavo's right to live believe the above. This explains their passion and emotionalism. They believe they are fighting for an invaluable and irreplaceable human life. They are like the mother who is famously said to have lifted the back of a small car off the ground to save a child caught under a tire. You're desperate to save a life, you're shot through with adrenaline, your strength is for half a second superhuman, you do the impossible.

That is what they are trying to do.

They do not want an innocent human life ended for what appear to be primarily practical and worldly reasons--e.g., Mrs. Schiavo's quality of life is low, her life is pointless. They say: Who is to say it is pointless? And what does pointless even mean? Maybe life itself is the point.

I do not understand the emotionalism of the pull-the-tube people. What is driving their engagement? Is it because they are compassionate, and their hearts bleed at the thought that Mrs. Schiavo suffers? But throughout this case no one has testified that she is in persistent pain, as those with terminal cancer are.

If they care so much about her pain, why are they unconcerned at the suffering caused her by the denial of food and water? And why do those who argue for Mrs. Schiavo's death employ language and imagery that is so violent and aggressive? The chairman of the Democratic National Committee calls Republicans "brain dead." Michael Schiavo, the husband, calls House Majority Leader Tom DeLay "a slithering snake."

Everyone who has written in defense of Mrs. Schiavo's right to live has received e-mail blasts full of attacks that appear to have been dictated by the unstable and typed by the unhinged. On Democratic Underground they crowed about having "kicked the sh-- out of the fascists." On Tuesday James Carville's face was swept with a sneer so convulsive you could see his gums as he damned the Republicans trying to help Mrs. Schiavo. It would have seemed demonic if he weren't a buffoon.

Why are they so committed to this woman's death?

They seem to have fallen half in love with death.

What does Terri Schiavo's life symbolize to them? What does the idea that she might continue to live suggest to them?

Why does this prospect so unnerve them? Again, if you think Terri Schiavo is a precious human gift of God, your passion is explicable. The passion of the pull-the-tube people is not.

I do not understand their certainty. I don't "know" that any degree of progress or healing is possible for Terri Schiavo; I only hope they are. We can't know, but we can "err on the side of life." How do the pro-death forces "know" there is no possibility of progress, healing, miracles? They seem to think they know. They seem to love the phrases they bandy about: "vegetative state," "brain dead," "liquefied cortex."

I do not understand why people who want to save the whales (so do I) find campaigns to save humans so much less arresting. I do not understand their lack of passion. But the save-the-whales people are somehow rarely the stop-abortion-please people.

The PETA people, who say they are committed to ending cruelty to animals, seem disinterested in the fact of late-term abortion, which is a cruel procedure performed on a human.

I do not understand why the don't-drill-in-Alaska-and-destroy-its-prime-beauty people do not join forces with the don't-end-a-life-that-holds-within-it-beauty people.

I do not understand why those who want a freeze on all death penalty cases in order to review each of them in light of DNA testing--an act of justice and compassion toward those who have been found guilty of crimes in a court of law--are uninterested in giving every last chance and every last test to a woman whom no one has ever accused of anything.

There are passionate groups of women in America who decry spousal abuse, give beaten wives shelter, insist that a woman is not a husband's chattel. This is good work. Why are they not taking part in the fight for Terri Schiavo? Again, what explains their lack of passion on this? If Mrs. Schiavo dies, it will be because her husband, and only her husband, insists she wanted to, or would want to, or said she wanted to in a hypothetical conversation long ago. A thin reed on which to base the killing of a human being.

The pull-the-tube people say, "She must hate being brain-damaged." Well, yes, she must. (This line of argument presumes she is to some degree or in some way thinking or experiencing emotions.) Who wouldn't feel extreme sadness at being extremely disabled? I'd weep every day, wouldn't you? But consider your life. Are there not facets of it, or facts of it, that make you feel extremely sad, pained, frustrated, angry? But you're still glad you're alive, aren't you? Me too. No one enjoys a deathbed. Very few want to leave.

Terri Schiavo may well die. No good will come of it. Those who are half in love with death will only become more red-fanged and ravenous.

And those who are still learning--our children--oh, what terrible lessons they're learning. What terrible stories are shaping them. They're witnessing the Schiavo drama on television and hearing it on radio. They are seeing a society--their society, their people--on the verge of famously accepting, even embracing, the idea that a damaged life is a throwaway life.

Our children have been reared in the age of abortion, and are coming of age in a time when seemingly respectable people are enthusiastic for euthanasia. It cannot be good for our children, and the world they will make, that they are given this new lesson that human life is not precious, not touched by the divine, not of infinite value.

Once you "know" that--that human life is not so special after all--then everything is possible, and none of it is good. When a society comes to believe that human life is not inherently worth living, it is a slippery slope to the gas chamber. You wind up on a low road that twists past Columbine and leads toward Auschwitz. Today that road runs through Pinellas Park, Fla.

Ms. Noonan is a contributing editor of The Wall Street Journal and author of "A Heart, a Cross, and a Flag" (Wall Street Journal Books/Simon & Schuster), a collection of post-Sept. 11 columns, which you can buy from the OpinionJournal bookstore. Her column appears Thursdays.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/p...n/?id=110006460

[Tiger Al 0]

God made the world or he didn't. God made you or he didn't. If he did, your little human life is, and has been, touched by the divine. If this is true, it would be true of all humans, not only some. And so--again, if it is true--each human life is precious, of infinite value, worthy of great respect.

Bet you wouldn't find this sentiment in this article if it were entitled "In Love With the Death Penalty-The bizarre passion of the flip switch people."

[AURaptor 1,126]

God made the world or he didn't. God made you or he didn't. If he did, your little human life is, and has been, touched by the divine. If this is true, it would be true of all humans, not only some. And so--again, if it is true--each human life is precious, of infinite value, worthy of great respect.

Bet you wouldn't find this sentiment in this article if it were entitled "In Love With the Death Penalty-The bizarre passion of the flip switch people."

152604[/snapback]

When you can equate the life of a murderer or a rapist to that of Terry Shiavo, let us know. To my knowledge, Terry did not deprive anyone else of their life or liberty. To those who did so knowingly and with malace, I have no problem taking their life away.

To compare keeping Terry Shiavo alive and sparing the life of a murderer is an inane and ridiculous position.

[Auburn85 432]

They don't "flip the switch" anymore. They put people to sleeep. If done properly, it's painless.

[TitanTiger 20,509]

God made the world or he didn't. God made you or he didn't. If he did, your little human life is, and has been, touched by the divine. If this is true, it would be true of all humans, not only some. And so--again, if it is true--each human life is precious, of infinite value, worthy of great respect.

Bet you wouldn't find this sentiment in this article if it were entitled "In Love With the Death Penalty-The bizarre passion of the flip switch people."

152604[/snapback]

Al, did you skim past this portion of the article?

I do not understand why those who want a freeze on all death penalty cases in order to review each of them in light of DNA testing--an act of justice and compassion toward those who have been found guilty of crimes in a court of law--are uninterested in giving every last chance and every last test to a woman whom no one has ever accused of anything.

If you can't see the difference between a person like Terri Schaivo and someone who murdered another person, then there's simply no talking to you. I think human life is valuable and freedom is a basic right that should be afforded to all...unless you commit crimes. Then you don't get freedom anymore, regardless of how valuable your humanity may be. And if you step so far as to take life from another...then your life being forfeited is justice. Not cruelty. Justice.

There is no equating the two situations.

[Auburn85 432]

Yeah, in some cases, people on death row for over 20 years. Yet to remove a feeding tube, it takes less than 10?

[Auburn85 432]

Charles Manson is still being fed

[Tiger Al 0]

Charles Manson is still being fed

152612[/snapback]

And still in prison.

[TexasTiger 12,997]

God made the world or he didn't. God made you or he didn't. If he did, your little human life is, and has been, touched by the divine. If this is true, it would be true of all humans, not only some. And so--again, if it is true--each human life is precious, of infinite value, worthy of great respect.

Bet you wouldn't find this sentiment in this article if it were entitled "In Love With the Death Penalty-The bizarre passion of the flip switch people."

152604[/snapback]

Al, did you skim past this portion of the article?

I do not understand why those who want a freeze on all death penalty cases in order to review each of them in light of DNA testing--an act of justice and compassion toward those who have been found guilty of crimes in a court of law--are uninterested in giving every last chance and every last test to a woman whom no one has ever accused of anything.

If you can't see the difference between a person like Terri Schaivo and someone who murdered another person, then there's simply no talking to you. I think human life is valuable and freedom is a basic right that should be afforded to all...unless you commit crimes. Then you don't get freedom anymore, regardless of how valuable your humanity may be. And if you step so far as to take life from another...then your life being forfeited is justice. Not cruelty. Justice.

There is no equating the two situations.

152609[/snapback]

Man's justice. But a violation of God's law.

[tiger88 934]

You could just as easily write an article called "Afraid to Die" with the opposite spin on it.

Can someone answer this for me? I heard somewhere that she is in her condition due to the effects of anorexia nervosa, and have no idea if it is true. Does anyone know how she got where she is?

[Tiger Al 0]

If you can't see the difference between a person like Terri Schaivo and someone who murdered another person, then there's simply no talking to you.

Of course there's a difference, but if you claim to be pro-life and you believe the passage that I highlighted, then how can you believe that the only way justice can be served is to kill? How is justice slighted by incarcerating someone for life? Yes, our sense of revenge is short-changed but how is revenge virtuous?

[Auburn85 432]

What if someone put a pillow over her face and smothered her, would they be criminally charged? She supposed to feel no pain. Yet allowing her to dehydrate and starve is ok?

[TexasTiger 12,997]

If you can't see the difference between a person like Terri Schaivo and someone who murdered another person, then there's simply no talking to you.

Of course there's a difference, but if you claim to be pro-life and you believe the passage that I highlighted, then how can you believe that the only way justice can be served is to kill? How is justice slighted by incarcerating someone for life? Yes, our sense of revenge is short-changed but how is revenge virtuous?

152656[/snapback]

You must not have the annotated Bible:

"Thou shall not kill."*

*Except in cases to be determined by individual governments, in which case, this rule is flexible.

[TitanTiger 20,509]

Man's justice.  But a violation of God's law.

152646[/snapback]

Actually, no. God's justice. Man carries it out.

Numbers 35:30

30 “If anyone kills a person, the murderer shall be put to death on the evidence of witnesses. But no person shall be put to death on the testimony of one witness.

You murder, you die. That is justice. Any lesser sentence is given only by the mercy and compassion of God and those He has put in authority. But make no mistake: executing a murderer is justice.

Now, is that to say that we cannot require a very high standard of evidence to qualify for death sentences and reserve it only for premeditated crimes? No. Even God sometimes allowed the lives of murderers to be spared. But it's not a requirement to grant all murderers. And it is not a contradiction to be pro-life with regard to defenseless, innocent beings, but in favor of death sentences for those who murder others.

And just to address the inevitable misquoting of the Ten Commandments, the proper translation of the passage is "You shall not murder". The word translated "kill" in the KJV, but translated as "murder" in virtually every English translation since is a different and more specific term that the Hebrew word normally translated as "kill" in the rest of the OT. The term specifically refers to the taking of human life either intentionally, or through willful carelessness or neglect.

[MDM4AU 336]

If you can't see the difference between a person like Terri Schaivo and someone who murdered another person, then there's simply no talking to you.

Of course there's a difference, but if you claim to be pro-life and you believe the passage that I highlighted, then how can you believe that the only way justice can be served is to kill? How is justice slighted by incarcerating someone for life? Yes, our sense of revenge is short-changed but how is revenge virtuous?

152656[/snapback]

You must not have the annotated Bible:

"Thou shall not kill."*

*Except in cases to be determined by individual governments, in which case, this rule is flexible.

152660[/snapback]

Here is something I found a while back while pondering this question:

The Old Testament law commanded the death penalty for various acts:  murder (Exodus 21:12), kidnapping (Exodus 21:16), bestiality (Exodus 22:19); adultery (Lev 20:10); homosexuality (Lev 20:13), a false prophet (Deut 13:5), prostitution and rape (Deut 22:4), and several other crimes.  However, God often showed mercy when the death penalty was due.  David committed adultery and murder, yet God did not demand his life be taken (2Sam 11:1-5, 14-17; 2Sam 12:13).  Ultimately, each and every sin we commit should result in the death penalty (Rom 6:23).  Thankfully, God demonstrates His love for us in not condemning us (Rom 5:8).

Jesus Himself did not ever directly address capital punishment (or if He did it is not recorded in the Bible).  Jesus did recognize the authority God had given to government (John 18:9-11).  God was the One who instituted capital punishment:  “Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed, for in the image of God He made man” (Gen 9:6).  Jesus did not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it (Matt 5:17).  Therefore, I would say that Jesus would support capital punishment.  Jesus also demonstrated grace when capital punishment was due (John 8:1-11).  The Apostle Paul definitely recognized the power of the government to institute capital punishment where appropriate (Romans 13:1-5).

So, basically we are back to were we started.  Yes, God allows capital punishment.  But at the same time, God does not always demand the death penalty when it is due.  What should a Christian’s view on the death penalty be then?  First, we must remember that God has instituted capital punishment in His Word, therefore it would be presumptuous of us to think that we could institute a higher standard than Him or be more kind than He.  God has the highest standard of any being since He is perfect. This standard applies not only to us but to Himself. Therefore, He loves to an infinite degree and He has mercy to an infinite degree. We also see that He has wrath to an infinite degree and it is all maintained in a perfect balance.

LINK

Food for thought...

[TexasTiger 12,997]

If you can't see the difference between a person like Terri Schaivo and someone who murdered another person, then there's simply no talking to you.

Of course there's a difference, but if you claim to be pro-life and you believe the passage that I highlighted, then how can you believe that the only way justice can be served is to kill? How is justice slighted by incarcerating someone for life? Yes, our sense of revenge is short-changed but how is revenge virtuous?

152656[/snapback]

You must not have the annotated Bible:

"Thou shall not kill."*

*Except in cases to be determined by individual governments, in which case, this rule is flexible.

152660[/snapback]

Here is something I found a while back while pondering this question:

The Old Testament law commanded the death penalty for various acts:  murder (Exodus 21:12), kidnapping (Exodus 21:16), bestiality (Exodus 22:19); adultery (Lev 20:10); homosexuality (Lev 20:13), a false prophet (Deut 13:5), prostitution and rape (Deut 22:4), and several other crimes.  However, God often showed mercy when the death penalty was due.  David committed adultery and murder, yet God did not demand his life be taken (2Sam 11:1-5, 14-17; 2Sam 12:13).  Ultimately, each and every sin we commit should result in the death penalty (Rom 6:23).  Thankfully, God demonstrates His love for us in not condemning us (Rom 5:8).

Jesus Himself did not ever directly address capital punishment (or if He did it is not recorded in the Bible).  Jesus did recognize the authority God had given to government (John 18:9-11).  God was the One who instituted capital punishment:  “Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed, for in the image of God He made man” (Gen 9:6).  Jesus did not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it (Matt 5:17).  Therefore, I would say that Jesus would support capital punishment.  Jesus also demonstrated grace when capital punishment was due (John 8:1-11).  The Apostle Paul definitely recognized the power of the government to institute capital punishment where appropriate (Romans 13:1-5).

So, basically we are back to were we started.  Yes, God allows capital punishment.  But at the same time, God does not always demand the death penalty when it is due.  What should a Christian’s view on the death penalty be then?  First, we must remember that God has instituted capital punishment in His Word, therefore it would be presumptuous of us to think that we could institute a higher standard than Him or be more kind than He.  God has the highest standard of any being since He is perfect. This standard applies not only to us but to Himself. Therefore, He loves to an infinite degree and He has mercy to an infinite degree. We also see that He has wrath to an infinite degree and it is all maintained in a perfect balance.

LINK

Food for thought...

152664[/snapback]

Christ was actually quite the rebel and challenged many aspects of the status quo:

Matthew 38-42. Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also. And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain. Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

43-48. Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so? Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

He also said lusting in your heart was no better than adultery. Do we deserve the death penalty for that? Or was that just another way of saying "all have sinned and come short of the glory of God?"

[TitanTiger 20,509]

Texas,

You sort of sidestepped the issue by cherry picking a few verses. The whole counsel of Scripture gives a more informed and complete view on the matter and MDM's quote said it quite well:

Yes, God allows capital punishment.  But at the same time, God does not always demand the death penalty when it is due.  What should a Christian’s view on the death penalty be then?  First, we must remember that God has instituted capital punishment in His Word, therefore it would be presumptuous of us to think that we could institute a higher standard than Him or be more kind than He.  God has the highest standard of any being since He is perfect.

There's no escaping this conclusion from Scripture, if that's going to be your basis for argument. It's not either/or in God's eyes. It's both/and. The death penalty is an option and it is just. But God doesn't always demand it even when it's deserved. I think this is a reasonable middle ground to take.

In fact, I would support a "tiered" standard of evidence in cases involving potential "capital crimes". The basic "beyond a reasonable doubt" is sufficient for life in prison. A higher level of proof or certainty for death. Whether it be DNA, photo or video evidence, multiple eyewitnesses, or some combination of several kinds of evidence, I'm all for that. And I believe that a moratorium on the DP in all states to give time for DNA evidence to be pursued is completely reasonable and just basic decency.

[TexasTiger 12,997]

Texas,

You sort of sidestepped the issue by cherry picking a few verses.  The whole counsel of Scripture gives a more informed and complete view on the matter and MDM's quote said it quite well:

Yes, God allows capital punishment.  But at the same time, God does not always demand the death penalty when it is due.  What should a Christian’s view on the death penalty be then?  First, we must remember that God has instituted capital punishment in His Word, therefore it would be presumptuous of us to think that we could institute a higher standard than Him or be more kind than He.  God has the highest standard of any being since He is perfect.

There's no escaping this conclusion from Scripture, if that's going to be your basis for argument. It's not either/or in God's eyes. It's both/and. The death penalty is an option and it is just. But God doesn't always demand it even when it's deserved. I think this is a reasonable middle ground to take.

In fact, I would support a "tiered" standard of evidence in cases involving potential "capital crimes". The basic "beyond a reasonable doubt" is sufficient for life in prison. A higher level of proof or certainty for death. Whether it be DNA, photo or video evidence, multiple eyewitnesses, or some combination of several kinds of evidence, I'm all for that. And I believe that a moratorium on the DP in all states to give time for DNA evidence to be pursued is completely reasonable and just basic decency.

152671[/snapback]

Do you think that the teachings of Christ contradict any teachings of the Old Testament?

[TitanTiger 20,509]

Texas,

You sort of sidestepped the issue by cherry picking a few verses.  The whole counsel of Scripture gives a more informed and complete view on the matter and MDM's quote said it quite well:

Yes, God allows capital punishment.  But at the same time, God does not always demand the death penalty when it is due.  What should a Christian’s view on the death penalty be then?  First, we must remember that God has instituted capital punishment in His Word, therefore it would be presumptuous of us to think that we could institute a higher standard than Him or be more kind than He.  God has the highest standard of any being since He is perfect.

There's no escaping this conclusion from Scripture, if that's going to be your basis for argument. It's not either/or in God's eyes. It's both/and. The death penalty is an option and it is just. But God doesn't always demand it even when it's deserved. I think this is a reasonable middle ground to take.

In fact, I would support a "tiered" standard of evidence in cases involving potential "capital crimes". The basic "beyond a reasonable doubt" is sufficient for life in prison. A higher level of proof or certainty for death. Whether it be DNA, photo or video evidence, multiple eyewitnesses, or some combination of several kinds of evidence, I'm all for that. And I believe that a moratorium on the DP in all states to give time for DNA evidence to be pursued is completely reasonable and just basic decency.

152671[/snapback]

Do you think that the teachings of Christ contradict any teachings of the Old Testament?

152675[/snapback]

The short answer is "no", not in the way you're thinking. The long answer is too detailed to get into at 12:30AM. A quick hitter would be: Christ's life (including his teachings), death and resurrection did not abrogate the Law, it fulfilled it. In some instances like the ceremonial laws (clean and unclean things, sacrifices, etc.), those were a shadow of what was to come in Christ. Those shadows are no longer necessary as the One they were pointing to and the principles they illustrated are completed in Christ. Christ cleanses our hearts and His sacrifice is THE once and for all sacrifice for the atonement of our sin.

The moral law (our conduct) was not cast aside. In fact Christ reaffirmed it time and again in His teachings. Christ redirected our attention to the spirit behind the Law...hence your example of lust in one's heart being the same in essence as adultery. And keeping the spirit of the Law rather than just the letter is a much harder task.

It's like God had to speak to the early Israelites like we speak to our children. We give very clear and unambiguous lines of right and wrong when they are little and there are clear consequences to disobedience. But as they get older, we are able to not communicate just the "family rules", but the reasons behind them...our family's "core values" to our child. And perhaps instead of an instant pop on the behind or "timeout", we sit down and have a heart to heart with the child to help them understand the importance of the issue at hand and why it matters. We may not even decide to punish them this time because we feel the "lesson" got through and punishment is unnecessary. Deserved, but not needed. We showed mercy that time. I think in the same way, God progressively revealed more and more of Himself to mankind culminating in the person of Christ. At that point, the rigid ceremonial laws and ritual sacrifices were not needed...we were being ushered into a different kind of relationship with God. A deeper one and a more informed one. The core values (moral law) did not change, but we did get a fuller understanding of the moral law and the Spirit behind it.

That's as good as I can do right now.

[TexasTiger 12,997]

Texas,

You sort of sidestepped the issue by cherry picking a few verses.  The whole counsel of Scripture gives a more informed and complete view on the matter and MDM's quote said it quite well:

Yes, God allows capital punishment.  But at the same time, God does not always demand the death penalty when it is due.  What should a Christian’s view on the death penalty be then?  First, we must remember that God has instituted capital punishment in His Word, therefore it would be presumptuous of us to think that we could institute a higher standard than Him or be more kind than He.  God has the highest standard of any being since He is perfect.

There's no escaping this conclusion from Scripture, if that's going to be your basis for argument. It's not either/or in God's eyes. It's both/and. The death penalty is an option and it is just. But God doesn't always demand it even when it's deserved. I think this is a reasonable middle ground to take.

In fact, I would support a "tiered" standard of evidence in cases involving potential "capital crimes". The basic "beyond a reasonable doubt" is sufficient for life in prison. A higher level of proof or certainty for death. Whether it be DNA, photo or video evidence, multiple eyewitnesses, or some combination of several kinds of evidence, I'm all for that. And I believe that a moratorium on the DP in all states to give time for DNA evidence to be pursued is completely reasonable and just basic decency.

152671[/snapback]

Do you think that the teachings of Christ contradict any teachings of the Old Testament?

152675[/snapback]

The short answer is "no", not in the way you're thinking. The long answer is too detailed to get into at 12:30AM. A quick hitter would be: Christ's life (including his teachings), death and resurrection did not abrogate the Law, it fulfilled it. In some instances like the ceremonial laws (clean and unclean things, sacrifices, etc.), those were a shadow of what was to come in Christ. Those shadows are no longer necessary as the One they were pointing to and the principles they illustrated are completed in Christ. Christ cleanses our hearts and His sacrifice is THE once and for all sacrifice for the atonement of our sin.

The moral law (our conduct) was not cast aside. In fact Christ reaffirmed it time and again in His teachings. Christ redirected our attention to the spirit behind the Law...hence your example of lust in one's heart being the same in essence as adultery. And keeping the spirit of the Law rather than just the letter is a much harder task.

It's like God had to speak to the early Israelites like we speak to our children. We give very clear and unambiguous lines of right and wrong when they are little and there are clear consequences to disobedience. But as they get older, we are able to not communicate just the "family rules", but the reasons behind them...our family's "core values" to our child. And perhaps instead of an instant pop on the behind or "timeout", we sit down and have a heart to heart with the child to help them understand the importance of the issue at hand and why it matters. We may not even decide to punish them this time because we feel the "lesson" got through and punishment is unnecessary. Deserved, but not needed. We showed mercy that time. I think in the same way, God progressively revealed more and more of Himself to mankind culminating in the person of Christ. At that point, the rigid ceremonial laws and ritual sacrifices were not needed...we were being ushered into a different kind of relationship with God. A deeper one and a more informed one. The core values (moral law) did not change, but we did get a fuller understanding of the moral law and the Spirit behind it.

That's as good as I can do right now.

152678[/snapback]

I understand your reasoning, although we will have to respectfully disagree on your final conclusion on this particular point. Theologists are split on this issue, as well.

Understanding that you believe a death penalty can be acceptable in God's eyes, do you believe that he approves of how it is handed out in our current justice system?

[CCTAU 3,339]

Charles Manson is still being fed

152612[/snapback]

And still in prison.

152645[/snapback]

So is Terri Schaivo !

[TitanTiger 20,509]

Understanding that you believe a death penalty can be acceptable in God's eyes, do you believe that he approves of how it is handed out in our current justice system?

152683[/snapback]

I would have to say no. I think He's more than not pleased. He's grieved. Therefore, I would wholeheartedly support a national moratorium on the death penalty until some kind of minimum standards are put into place for death sentences raise the bar for level of proof required. Otherwise, simple "beyond a reasonable doubt" will only get a life sentence. I also mentioned some of the kinds of proof above. Even Scripture required more than one eyewitness for a death sentence to be meted out. They didn't have fingerprint and DNA technology back then, but the principle is the same: be darn sure you've got the right guy. Thus we also need to reopen any case where DNA evidence might confirm or exclude the convicted perp. There's simply no good reason for anyone to be denied access to DNA testing. I'd rather let 100 murderers live in prison than execute one innocent person.

I would also have the government address the issue of defense council and the disparity between what a rich defendant is able to get in terms of a defense and what a poor person gets. Maybe all criminal defense attorneys no matter their normal rate should be required to divide up the pro bono or lesser paying work (in capital cases) for defendants who can't afford to get the better lawyers. Too much is on the line in capital cases to allow it to be decided by one guy affording a dream team of lawyers and another getting whatever the public defenders office can scrounge up.

[Tigermike 3,048]

Isn't it a little ironic that on Good Friday we are discussing whether or not a death penalty is acceptable in God's eyes? I realize we are discussing the death penalty within our judicial system but: Isn't it a little ironic that on Good Friday we are discussing whether or not a death penalty is acceptable in God's eyes? I mean didn't He require sacrifice and death?

Oh and BTW, Tex you are asking good questions and Titan you are explaining very well and making great points. Just thought to let you both know.

[TexasTiger 12,997]

Isn't it a little ironic that on Good Friday we are discussing whether or not a death penalty is acceptable in God's eyes? I realize we are discussing the death penalty within our judicial system but: Isn't it a little ironic that on Good Friday we are discussing whether or not a death penalty is acceptable in God's eyes?  I mean didn't He require sacrifice and death?

Oh and BTW, Tex you are asking good questions and Titan you are explaining very well and making great points.  Just thought to let you both know.

152789[/snapback]

Christ died to pay the price of our sins so that we would not have to pay the same price if we accepted him as our savior. Which could raise the question as to whether the death penalty was still necessary in God's eyes after Christ died on the cross. Until God decides it is time, each person may still have salvation. Man interferes with that process by taking the life of the person. Beyond that, though, Christ was put to death by the state for a crime he did not commit. In that way, his death may also serve as a statement against the death penalty.

[DKW 86 7,439]

Isn't it a little ironic that on Good Friday we are discussing whether or not a death penalty is acceptable in God's eyes? I realize we are discussing the death penalty within our judicial system but: Isn't it a little ironic that on Good Friday we are discussing whether or not a death penalty is acceptable in God's eyes?  I mean didn't He require sacrifice and death?

Oh and BTW, Tex you are asking good questions and Titan you are explaining very well and making great points.  Just thought to let you both know.

152789[/snapback]

Christ died to pay the price of our sins so that we would not have to pay the same price if we accepted him as our savior. Which could raise the question as to whether the death penalty was still necessary in God's eyes after Christ died on the cross. Until God decides it is time, each person may still have salvation. Man interferes with that process by taking the life of the person. Beyond that, though, Christ was put to death by the state for a crime he did not commit. In that way, his death may also serve as a statement against the death penalty.

152796[/snapback]

Tex, I hate to interupt here but..

Romans 3:23

"For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."

Romans 6:23a

"...The wages of sin is death..."

Therefore we are under a death sentence now, because of adultery murder, lust, etc. David was "Saved" because he accepted his salvation as a believer and he was also "punished." His first son with Bathsheba was killed for David's transgressions.