100% in the mercy camp with you S.P.

My views on this subject changed 180 degrees -- oddly enough -- thanks to the movie "Dead Man Walking." Rarely does a film make me reflect long enough to truly effect my views but for some reason, that one did.

From that day forward -- and butressed by plenty of research into the empty arguments which favor the death penalty -- I've been a advocate of mercy over revenge.

It seems the only reason for withholding clemency from "Tookie" is that he refuses to accept guilt for the crimes for which he was convicted. I can understand this if it were a consideration for PAROLE and release, but not for a stay of execution when the offender may be incarcerated for life. A repeat offender or recidivist can be tried again, and jailed. An execution is too final: a dead man cannot be brought back to life. And if it would make the difference, wouldn't it be easier for EVERY death row inmate to express remorse to avoid their execution?

And why is it the very same people bent upon "the sanctity of life" -- even in the form of stem cells -- are so willing to take a life in this situation? Either life is sacred or it is not...

Finally, how can the taking of a life mitigate the loss of another?

will murder Stanley Williams and not repent of his crime.

There is no benefit whatsoever in Williams

being executed.

I am trying to believe that Schwartzenegger's action is not political.

for many reasons...

1. there are still innocents being sent to the death chamber
   
   
2. while watching your <insert family relation here>'s killer die might bring a sense of satisfaction, that satisfaction is usually short-lived, especially when it comes back to you that the relation he killed is still dead.
   
   
3. if the death-row inmate has in fact repented and is helping others come around.
   

   --now #3 is a mine-field, I know.  How can we ever be sure that they come around?  Tookie Williams apparently has never shown any remorse for those who, according to the conviction, died at his hand.  This, to me at least, counts as something when considering clemency.....how sorry is he?

4) have they ever helped bring to justice others they know were involved in activity that might itself qualify for death-row?

  --this is also a mine-field.  Many would not want to mitigate the sentence, even if he sings, and beings others to justice.  But to me, helping Justice should count for something, especially if it makes one a marked man among other prisoners.

Don't misunderstand.....I'm not totally against the death penalty.   There are monsters that should be put down (Richard Allen Davis for one).  I just feel that, especially in cases that predate DNA evidence (where applicable), among others, we should be absolutely sure we're sending the right guy there.

I hope good St. Peter doesn't come back to me and "sorry, but you're getting Justice instead".....

Death by the hand of another is always a tragedy.  For the slain; for loved ones of the slain; for the slayer and their loved ones.

Killing Tookie Williams tonight will serve no purpose.  Perhaps ease the suffering of the loved ones of the families of the victims ... but is that really enough.

Beyond which ... we are ... supposedly ... a civilized country and as such, should not resort to the barbarity of taking life.    What justice can there be in state sanctioned death because a law says it's okay?   We had a law that said it wasn't okay for a while too ... so which is right?

and I don't want love.

I want to be understood, without which all the others are meaningless - and from which all the others descend.

If he had murdered my wife or child I would kill him myself without a moments hesitation. Moral high ground could go screw. He'd be dead as dead and I wouldn't look back.

That's why it's never in the hands of those who's lives were completely destroyed by the guilty party. If it were, there would be no question. Once the man is in the system, the emotions of the loved ones won't get in the way of doing what's right, which is give the man a life sentence instead of killing him.

would be writing childrens books too to show all the gullible people what a sympathetic character ive become how ive repented and how guilty you moral animals ought to feel to let me die despite my dramatic rehabilitation....

On the death penalty it all comes down to what a person believes happens after death, if death the final stop point or a merely a release to move on.  

I can't get my head around the concept of a society administering a death sentence. There can be be no other reason for it beyond state retribution and I find the concept of letting the victims family watch incredibly barbaric.

The abolition of the death penalty seems to me one of the final steps a state needs to make to take in order to provide the elusive "freedom" to its citizens.

"in fact, once in high school i got detention for a spit ball i didnt shoot"

Why did you accept being punished for something you did not do?  

if we had public hangings

is obscene.

That a government which ostensibly represents it's people can--and does--go through such an operatic procedure to rid society of of what has been determined to be a diseased and dangerous animal is, to me, the single most grotesque and bizarre activity human beings do in groups.

http://www.bernama.com.my/bernama/v3/news.php?id=168099

December 02, 2005 10:31 AM    

Singapore Hangs Aussie Drug Trafficker Nguyen Tuong Van

By Jackson Sawatan

SINGAPORE, Dec 2 (Bernama) -- Singapore executed convicted Australian drug trafficker Nguyen Tuong Van at Changi Prison at dawn Friday after numerous attempts, including repeated pleas from the Australian government, to save him from the gallows proved futile.

When I get to the Pearly Gates, I hope, and need, to receive mercy.  The only way to receive mercy is to be merciful.

I'm not liberal, but oppose the death penalty for these reasons:

1.  It seems contradictory to be pro-life (opposed to abortion and euthanasia) and to also support executing criminals.  John Paul II's new  teaching in his 1995 encyclical Evangelium Vitae shaped my view here.  It's a tough teaching, which I have had to work at accepting ... but foregoing vengefulness is spiritually essential.
   
   
2.  There is real evidence of miscarriages of justice - convictions of the innocent.  Wrongful imprisonment is bad enough; wrongful execution is worse.  At the least, if an innocent man is imprisoned, he can be freed and given some compensation for his loss.  None of us can resurrect the dead.
   
   
3.  Giving government the power to execute is a dangerous matter, especially when the feds and other authorities are ripping Constitutional protections to shreds.  I believe that we're going into another totalitarian epoch, similar to 1914-1945 ... and do not want to create laws and  precedents and customs that will make it easier for tyrants to kill their opponents.
   
   
4.  Tolkien: "Many that live deserve death.  And some that die deserve life.  Can you give it to them?  Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement.  For even the very wise cannot see all ends." (Gandalf, in Fellowship of the Ring, ch. 2)

Lee

By Howard Mintz

Mercury News

California early this morning executed Stanley Tookie Williams, whose quest for death row redemption was not enough to overcome his conviction for four 1979 murders and his role in forming one of the most violent street gangs in the United States.

Mercury News

Justice or mercy, why not neither.  As a matter of policy, the correct choice is usually pragmatic expedience.

To put it simply, as long as it is more expensive to execute someone than it is to hold them for life without parole, and the rate of escape is very low, there is verly little reason to execute people.  (Notably, I believe that the extra costs are primarly due to extra legal process.)

When the cost of executing someone becomes smaller than the cost of incarcerating them, execution starts looking much more reasonable.  Similarly, if incarceration is unreliable there is a benefit to insuring that dangerous people are permanantly removed from society.

...make it to the Pearly Gates, and Saint Peter asks, "justice or mercy?" Which will you choose?

Did you mean to couch this question in a Christian context?

Though Peter is a Biblical character, I believe "...Peter admitting through the Pearly Gates..." is more a Christian tradition that something actually mentioned in the Bible?

However, the question of "justice or mercy?" is certainly fits well in a Christian context.  

As for me I'm not aware that the question would fit in any other religious or philosophical context.

Of course in a Christian context the "mercy" aspect is only available through faith in Jesus Christ. (Christ a title not a name)

People want justice. It's what they expect from the government; it's what they expect from the Creator.

People need mercy. It's how you get through those gates.

I don't believe I've seen in the reports related to Mr. Williams's situation any mention of his faith.

to fight a war "if necessary"

we accept the need for an army, and the need for killing

we even accept the need for killing innocents

but killing criminals is beyond the moral pale?

Too many people devoting all energy to "death penalty" and not enough questioning war

I support the possibility of a death penalty, but think the penalty should be infrequent.  Too many mistakes; too much prejudice

I also think that the Governor should always be required to personally administer the sentence.  Make the responsibility real.

But in the end, the death penalty is needed so the public does not feel powerless.  If there is a sense that we must be victims to violence with no hope of recourse, the rage and frustration and fear will be funneled into vigilante action or reactionary politics

is that not moral enough?  well, who among the courageous have stopped paying their income tax to protest the Iraq War?

too much death penalty debate is posturing (on both sides)

it goes to the front page and you won't have to correct the mistakes I'll make. :)

at midnight.  

adds a bit of theatrical macabre to the whole affair.

so clever ahnolt...

"His crime"? "Murder"? Am I missing something? I thought there would have to be a pretext of something unlawful to occur before crime and murder can be honestly considered.

The benefit for him being executed is whatever small chance of him repeating was just reduced to nil.

I imagine it to be a safe bet that Ah-nold's action was political. He is/was on thin ice with his base out there, correct?

about Arnie executing Tookie or whether someone wants would chose justice vs. mercy in their own life?

for each of us in our lives...

Unfortunately for williams, it's already decided.....he'll meet his maker tonight.

excellent question.

do you think that it would be too severe a punishment to apply the death penalty to the celebrities who have spoken out in support of saving tookie?  im thinking life would not be inappropriate but also see the merits of execution by repeated flicks to the noggin'...

The fact that innocent men have neen convicted and sentenced to death and executed is why.

sadly the pursuit of wealth and glory have seen wisdom kicked out the door.

We need a new socrates to arise!

sat in jail for 50 or 60 or more years as well.  a travesty.  perhaps we should disallow life sentences...  in fact, once in high school i got detention for a spit ball i didnt shoot.  

eradicate detention today!!!

people who have been wrongly imprisoned and/or detained after school. there is no way to remunerate a person who is dead because of a mistake.

got a second detention for doing so.  they had to restrain me with a haldol syringe in my ass...

i was unjustly persecuted by the man for being a black jewish faygala...

it happened countless times.

truth be told, on one or perhaps a dozen occasions i was indeed guitly and drowning in pernicious intent but please do not mention this to my parole officer...

tar and feathering did wonders....

it doesn't work now.  We did have public hangings.  In fact some people liked it so much they hosted their own.   Everyone can be a killer with the right motivation.  

I'm not saying the death penalty isn't useful, it is.  Some people need to removed from the planet.   DNA confirmation, heinous crime, remove them.   I'm totally cool with dealing with them and the consequences in the next life time.  

(and podcasted) hangings would do wonders for morale in this country and would lessen violent crime by half if they were generously doled.  

it is a better solution than the banning of alcohol sales after 1am for obvious reasons.  

it tops your recommendation as hot tar is endlessly pesky for the sanitation crews who are left with the chore of scraping the the stuff from what seems like every inch of the town square...

yep, hanging is the way to go, is visceral, climactic and cleans up with little muss...

I was honestly curious and you've fed me goofy drama.   I've got smoke filters on my arse and they've been in place for decades.  LOL!

Sh*t, you took a punishment you didn't deserve, I wanted to know why you took it.  

those doing life without parole could get fresh air and exercise cleaning the tar. Might be a nice break from banging license plates which will be replaced by electronic GPS ones made in Micronesia anyway. Feathers could be a problem tho, lifers could catch bird flu and die to soon...

of the far right, Malkinesque LGF bloggers. It would give them something to be happy about. I suppose.

i will write but one sincere line this evening. it is for you and it follows thusly...

everything i got i had coming to me!

Precisely.

That's why I propose the "Capital Punishment Reform Act of 2006".  It works this way:

After a state-sanctioned execution, a board convenes that examines every aspect of the case in detail--no barriers of judicial motions, discovery laws, whatever--free power to subpoena anyone and everyone needed to get at the truth.  And the board, in 12 months, is required to deliver a bill of findings.

If the board decides that the condemned truly was innocent, the state does its best to set things aright by placing the names of the jurors in a hat and drawing, at random, the name of one who is then dragged from his home and shot on the spot.

An eye for an eye.  Balance is restored.  Life goes on.

----

Did Tookie ever offer evidence or testify against any of his homies?  It seems that as the founder of one of the most notorious gangs in the country, he'd have the dirt on lots of folks.  Surely, the death penalty could have been set aside as part of a deal in that case.

repentance and atonement as reasons for not commuting the sentence to life without parole, then I figure I can cross Church and state language lines as well and use the word "murder" - it has centuries of being a moral not just a legal term.

dictionary.com lists the top two meanings as:

1.To kill (another human) unlawfully. -and of course whose law comes in there...

2.To kill brutally or inhumanly.

But there is no point in discussing any further something I meant as an emotional reaction.

-------------------------------------------------

yes,in California- he's not all bright and shiny new any more to the base-

The attention and reaction in New Zealand and Australia to the hanging in Jakarta was INTENSE...as is the murder of Williams.

Don't get me wrong, you still have a majority of the populace, when polled, that would support a death penalty, in btrh countries.  But the cultural leadership, the media, the politicians, and most especially the churches, denounce capital punishment.

Despite the polling which supports capital punishment, there is no movement afoot to reinstate it. None of the poltical parties are moved to use this issue politically.  And there is no grass roots movement, as there never was in the US.  Even those that would kill seem OK that they can't, in the same way drinkers support the increasing penalties for drunk driving.  The know a better way when they see it.

The common take on American use of capital punishment is that it reflects the reality of a coarse, violent society.  The more sophistiated are horrified that the willingness to kill other human beings is used in the US for partisan purposes - to differentiate one party from another...and even more aghast at the tacit approval of the religious community.

but our information gathering and processing ability has been so degraded by the metastasis of profit motive that it's unlikely we'd ever perceive it as a society. We just have to do our best to choose, nurture and protect the Socrates' already amongst us.

central to Islam. Before ever Sura in the Qu'ran Allah is called the Most Merciful.

No, I didn't purposefully couch it in terms of Christianity. However, I did grow up in a Christian milieu and Christianity informs how I look at the world whether I like it or not.

I was, however, well aware that some may take this to be an almost overt Christian "frame" as you said.  I just didn't think it would be that big of a deal. And if it is, oh well that's just how I am.

that our president calls himself an evangelical Christian, says Jesus is his favorite philosopher, and admits to praying for direction in matters of state calls religion into public debate.

I find it appaling how he picks and chooses biblical messages to suit his purposes.

For instance, when asked about his past drug use, bush claims forgiveness by reason of repentance, saying that was part of the old george. But when Carla Faye Tucker claimed spiritual rebirth and pleaded to him for clemency, he mocked her pubicly and sent her to her death.

Mercy is also central to Islam. Before ever Sura in the Qu'ran Allah is called the Most Merciful

My understanding is that Islam does not have "personal salvation" or "forgiveness of sins." Both  concepts are,  of course, vital to Christianity.

When you see "mercy" in the Qu'ran, you need to question your viewpoint.

What you relate above is a characteristic of Allah but not the description of a relationship between a Muslim and Allah - assuming my understanding is correct.

A link ( to probably more that you ever wanted to know...)

http://www.ldolphin.org/islamprimer.html

.

.

.

The God of the Quran is not the God of the Bible. The Allah of the Quran does not establish a relationship with his people through covenants like the God of the Bible. Jesus has come as God in the flesh to establish the New Covenant with his people.

.

.

.

Sin and Atonement

The Quran teaches that one man cannot and should not pay for another man's sins.

Islam holds that men do not have a need to be saved. Islam does not address a need for salvation or deliverance from anything. Salvation is not in the vocabulary of Islam. Instead a Muslim obtains success by doing the will of Allah. This is the Islamic counterpart to deliverance and redemption that one finds in Christianity. Islam is a religion OF this world for humans who are of the Best Form, and are to be established in our call to success to partake in the Complete Way of Life.

In Islam, man is created in the best form and we are the master over creation. We are not at all deficient in our capabilities or our dignity. Christianity is seen as condemning those who are not completely deficient so that they will need a Christ to die for them. In Islam man is not saved by God's work, but instead the world is saved and transformed through us, the ones who do the will of Allah.

The biggest problem Muslims see with Christianity is that our perception of man degrades us and our dignity. Conversion to Islam is not based on the condemnation of the world. The Christian view of man is contradictory to the Muslim view of our essential nature (created in the Best Form). In Christianity we believe in original sin and that man is totally depraved in his efforts to be reconciled to God. In Christianity, humans have both SIN and sins. In Islam, humans only has sins. Since they are created in the Best Form we need to ask them then where their sin came from. They will say it came from Satan and their parents' example. Then ask where their parents' sin came from?

For Christians, Jesus atones for the forgiveness of our sins, both sins and SIN. Remember that original sin is a difficult concept for Muslims and will take time.

In Islam, if Muslims do not keep the law they will be condemned. They will give predictable excuses, and they will often say that God will have mercy and that Muhammad will make intercession for them (fate). But there is always a sense of not meeting the standard (not necessarily guilt). Islam is such a legalistic religion that they will either make it or not. Ask them where God's grace is, since they always say that God is gracious. Muslims do not have eternal security, only the option to submit to the will of God. Since there is no salvation in the Quran, they must hope that God will have mercy on them ("If God wills"). We as Christians know where grace is. Invite them to connect with the One who is full of Grace and Truth (John 1:17).

.

.

.

...like Tookie, bush refuses to admit what he has done and asks forgiveness from no one.

Me and others like me spent time in jail for supplying his habit.

more than anyone wants to know.  

Everyone should strive to understanding other cultures and religions. Converting Muslims to Christianity is best left to those to whom it's a concern.