Lets get a good death penalty debate going. 
Should governments execute murderers?
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
Hang 'em. It's cost effective because you can re-use the rope.
Redfin
New member
Yes.
It has been so from the beginning.
Genesis 9:6 - Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed, for in the image of God He made man.
The teaching of the New Testament in no way changed this principle.
Romans 13:4 - "...for it (authority) does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath upon the one who practices evil."
It should be done quickly though. "Justice delayed is justice denied."
It has been so from the beginning.
Genesis 9:6 - Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed, for in the image of God He made man.
The teaching of the New Testament in no way changed this principle.
Romans 13:4 - "...for it (authority) does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath upon the one who practices evil."
It should be done quickly though. "Justice delayed is justice denied."
Last edited:
I'm not for because of deep seeded "religious", "moral", or "ethical" reasons. To me its just practical. People who commit murder, rape, and who are traitors to their country, should be exicuted. For anything past those listed above, you had better have a really good argument.
Oh, plus people who steal cattle, and horses. You know, just as a throw back to "cow boy" justice.
Oh, plus people who steal cattle, and horses. You know, just as a throw back to "cow boy" justice.
Real Sorceror
New member
Heck ya! If you kill a guy, we kill you back! Thats how its gotta be!
I answered "yes" in the poll, because I do not oppose the use of captial punishment in some cases.
For example, in the case of the capture of say, Osama Bin Laden, I would expect him to be executed.
However, I think that the death penalty should be reserved as a 'nuclear option' in that it should be very rarely used and only in extreme circumstances.
Why? Because in spite of it's benefits, widespread use of the death penalty carries one tremendous liability: the virtual certainty that an innocent will be convicted of a crime not committed, and executed (murdered) by the state. In my mind, it's better that 10 murderers live than a single innocent be executed for a crime not committed.
Life without parole, especially in a place like Supermax, is probably worse than death, anyway.
For example, in the case of the capture of say, Osama Bin Laden, I would expect him to be executed.
However, I think that the death penalty should be reserved as a 'nuclear option' in that it should be very rarely used and only in extreme circumstances.
Why? Because in spite of it's benefits, widespread use of the death penalty carries one tremendous liability: the virtual certainty that an innocent will be convicted of a crime not committed, and executed (murdered) by the state. In my mind, it's better that 10 murderers live than a single innocent be executed for a crime not committed.
Life without parole, especially in a place like Supermax, is probably worse than death, anyway.
death2impiety
Maximeee's Husband
The death penalty isn't a deterrent! It's inhuman and Christ repealed eye for an eye!
Sorry, I'm just not used to all this agreement...
Sorry, I'm just not used to all this agreement...
Balder
New member
The people who saw the most innocent man in history get strung up and brutally killed by a corrupt government and a selfish people, and who believe all human beings are hopelessly wicked and untrustworthy (meaning their social institutions are bound to be as well), ALSO want to reinstitute a system of swift execution!
lovemeorhateme
Well-known member
Yes, the death penalty should be given to murderers. I fully support it.