[Vision2020] Government killing, etc.

Wed, 23 Jul 2003 18:06:03 -0700

Joshua,

Once again, the logic of the right wing is broken for a multitude of 
reasons:

Quiet ironic how you don't trust the government with your mail or schools 
but you trust them with your life?

You write:

"ignoring of course those that have corrupt officials since that eliminates 
the possibility of true justice"

Are you telling me the US Government is not Corrupt? Or are you telling me 
that it is OK to run people through a corrupt government that has the 
potential consequence of death? I can't see a "yes" to either one without 
you undermining your entire argument with this statement.

You fail to address  my major points of society being responsible for not 
producing murderers. This is not Christian to ignore the duties of 
preventing children from growing up to be violent and in poverty. It is 
cheaper to kill them when they get out of line than to fix them. This way we 
get to live in lives away from the crime.

Second, you misstate the facts.

"God is merciful, but requires justice to be done. The death penalty is part 
of our protection. Every society (ignoring of course those that have corrupt 
officials since that eliminates the possibility of true justice) that has a 
consistently applied death penalty always has lower crime and safer 
streets."

This is totally false. The nations that have abolished the Death Penalty 
have lower rates of Murder than those that do have the Death Penalty. 
Canada, Britain, Australia, France, Germany, and Italy don't have the Death 
Penalty. Yet they have much lower rates of murder. Likewise, California, 
Texas, and Virginia, have the highest number of murders per capita and have 
the Death Penalty. While states like Hew Hampshire and Vermont have no death 
penalty and lower per capita rates of murder.
Your Death Penalty does no good amongst people that want to die and could 
care less if you end their miserable life. "Murder-suicide" and "Death by 
Cop" are common. I think that life in prison would be more of a deterrent 
than Death.

You also confuse God with the State:

"But if unknowingly, there is probably no guilt for the judge and jury, 
because they are to listen to the witnesses and make a decision. If their 
decision was mislead because the witness was a lie, so be it. They did their 
God-given duty."

Just where does it say that serving on a jury and finding someone "guilty" 
is a "God-given duty"? I have never seen this written in the Bible or any 
other religious document whose author claims the credentials of God 
almighty.  I suppose you think God gave us the "Right to bare arms" as well?

Don't you also find it extremely odd that God would give us the right to 
judge who will live and who will die without giving us the most important 
ingredient of infallible judgment? I would tend to think that God would not 
be so careless in the treatment of his people if he really loved them. So 
why is God holding back on the information that would tell the jury if the 
accused is innocent of guilty? Does he think it is funny to fry an innocent 
man? Or does He not really care? Or perhaps He said "Thou shall not Judge" 
and actually really meant what he said.

You also write:

"And if by rare chance (and it is very very rare) a man is killed who was 
truly innocent of the crime, then those who sentenced him, if they did it 
knowingly, will be punished."

You mean to say it is OK to pick off one or two innocent people to make sure 
we get the real bad guys? Should our motto of Justice be "Kill and you 
absolutely will be killed, don't kill and you will might be killed anyway"?

I really think you are living in a fantasy world to think that it is OK to 
kill people in our messed up legal system and focuses on money rather than 
actual guilt or innocence. God didn't give humans the right to judge, only 
the right to love and forgive. Let us focus on this instead of covering the 
symptoms of hate with more hate and death.

Donovan J Arnold

>From: Joshua Nieuwsma <joshuahendrik@yahoo.com>
>To: vision <vision2020@moscow.com>
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Government killing, etc.
>Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 14:43:15 -0700 (PDT)
>
>Mr. Arnold wrote:
>
>"First, I don't buy the concept that government sanctioned killing is a law
>of God. From my understating God was very forgiving, and said let vengeance
>be his, not ours. We have every right to protect ourselves from people that
>may do us harm. But the death penalty is not protecting us, it is only used
>as an act of vengeance."
>
>God is merciful, but requires justice to be done. The death penalty is part 
>of our protection. Every society (ignoring of course those that have 
>corrupt officials since that eliminates the possibility of true justice) 
>that has a consistently applied death penalty always has lower crime and 
>safer streets. No matter how much you liberals want to deny it, fear of a 
>quick, speedy trial for murder, with the unbreakable promise of death at 
>the other end, is a strong deterrent for the criminal who would otherwise 
>kill for some money.
>
>Mr. Arnold goes on:
>
>"Second, it contradicts itself and generates more sin and violations of 
>Gods law. If a jury, a judge, and a prosecutor convict and send a person to 
>death
>for a murder they did not commit, are they not sending a person to death
>that is innocent? If so, then are they not committing a murder if they
>intentionally kill a person that is innocent? Under God's law, thou shall
>not kill, they have broken this. In doing such they are now themselves
>murderers. One could argue that the jury did not know for sure that the
>person did or did not really commit the crime. Which brings me to my point,
>only God can actually know this, so therefore, it is he, and he alone, that
>should take vengeance..."
>
>Mr. Arnold, you are in effect presuming to tell God what to do. And yet 
>your email is full of this "leave it to God to sort out" stuff. God says in 
>His Word very clearly that the man who spills innocent blood shall have his 
>own blood spilled. And if by rare chance (and it is very very rare) a man 
>is killed who was truly innocent of the crime, then those who sentenced 
>him, if they did it knowingly, will be punished. But if unknowingly, there 
>is probably no guilt for the judge and jury, because they are to listen to 
>the witnesses and make a decision. If their decision was mislead because 
>the witness was a lie, so be it. They did their God-given duty. God has 
>given the state the power of the sword to punish wrongdoers. And God was 
>not speaking merely of the flat of the sword for beating. Rather He 
>requires the state to use the sharp edge against the wicked throat.
>
>It is not a matter of killing, it is a matter of who is killed. A wicked 
>man, who has murdered, has forfeited his God-given right to live, and his 
>life is to be taken from him. The primary reason for that is justice, not 
>deterrent. Even if all the murderers in the world were encouraged when one 
>of their number was killed for murder, that would still not be a reason to 
>refuse to obey God and put that murderer to death. Any man who takes 
>innocent life shall lose his own. Actions have consequences because God 
>says so, not because it makes us feel just and wise (or in mr. arnold's 
>case, sick).
>
>cheers,
>
>Joshua Nieuwsma
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail