The Florida Senate on Tuesday passed a bill that would allow the death penalty for people who commit sexual batteries on children under age 12, sending the issue to Gov. Ron DeSantis.Lawmakers hope the bill (HB 1297) will ultimately lead to the U.S. Supreme Court reversing a 2008 decision that barred the death penalty for people who rape children. The state House passed the bill last week.Under the bill, defendants could receive death sentences based on the recommendations of at least eight of 12 jurors. Judges would have discretion to impose the death penalty or sentence defendants to life in prison. If fewer than eight jurors recommend death, defendants would receive life sentences.
The arguments for a death penalty carried the day in Florida, including one Senator who argued that "people who sexually abuse children can't be rehabilitated." One argument against the death penalty is religious...
"I love kids, and I'll do anything to protect them," Osgood said. "But I struggle from a faith perspective. If I believe in my faith that God can redeem and save anybody, then how do I support someone getting the death penalty?
The other argument against death was articulated by Thomas More 500 years ago:
"I think putting thieves to death is not lawful; and it is plain and obvious that it is absurd and of ill consequence to the commonwealth that a thief and a murderer should be equally punished; for if a robber sees that his danger is the same if he is convicted of theft as if he were guilty of murder, this will naturally incite him to kill the person whom otherwise he would only have robbed; since, if the punishment is the same, there is more security, and less danger of discovery, when he that can best make it is put out of the way; so that terrifying thieves too much provokes them to cruelty."
Let's be clear: Nothing needs to be punished by death.
ReplyDeleteThe Osgood mentioned in the article is Rosalind Osgood. She has experience with turning a life around:
ReplyDelete"Once a crack addict who lived on the streets and did jail time on drug-related charges, Osgood eventually entered rehab, earned master’s and doctorate degrees, and became an ordained minister at New Mount Olive Baptist Church in Fort Lauderdale, where she works to help poor people." (from 2009)
http://www.sfltimes.com/uncategorized/woman-turns-life-around-wins-award
A crack addict and someone that has the horrible curse of being attracted to a pre-pubescent child (an actual pedophile) and ACTS on it are not the same in any way. One needs support and services and can turn around, the other has a problem that will never go away.
DeleteI don't see a compelling reason why society should suffer the continued existence of these people. I could care less about who they may become, because the cost of that theoretical is a lifetime of suffering for an innocent.
ReplyDeleteThe death penalty has been proven to not be a deterrent to committing a given crime (e.g., last I heard embezzlement is a capital offense in China. People still do it.). That alone should make it nonsensical to institute such punishment. Beyond that, given the number of people daily who are being set free after being wrongly convicted... It's mind boggling why anyone would vote for the death penalty.
ReplyDeleteTo get non-PC, it's almost comical how many Christians are for the death penalty. Obviously "a la carte Christians" they are. An eye for an eye and all that ya know?
"It is better to let X guilty men [people] go free than to convict..."
Is it also "almost" comical how many people who would identify themselves as Christians are for abortion? Obviously a la carte Christians, they are?
DeleteI find nothing about the death penalty nor abortion to be at all comical.
"The death penalty has been proven to not be a deterrent to committing a given crime". The opposite is true. People who are executed have, 100% of the time, never committed the same crime again.
DeleteIs it also "almost" comical how many people who would identify themselves as Christians are for abortion?
DeleteNo. The Bible says nothing about abortion. Interpretation of what the Bible says about adjacent subjects is interpreted wildly differently by different christian communities, especially when looking beyond the American christian fundamentalist community.
Here's a overview with plenty of quotes:
https://ffrf.org/component/k2/item/26087-abortion-nontract#when-does-life-begin
The bible does not use the word 'abortion' but it's very clear how God feels about the life inside a pregnant woman - Exodus 21:22,23. Anything differing from the clear principals found in the Bible would indicate a false Christianity.
DeleteNepkarel, as always, thanks for your insights and for making my point. Not comical at all.
DeleteMy comment did not reference the Bible, it referred to Christians. Most Christian religions teach that abortion is wrong. Many people who identify as members of those religions are pro-choice, including our current president. I have no issue with that. People are free to express their own views on abortion and the death penalty regardless of their religion's teachings, and to support legislation that is aligned with those views
The Bible seems to be fairly clear on the death penalty, though as with any religious teaching, the Bible can be used to argue for or against. However, most would assert that the text in the Bible supports the death penalty. Hence, not comical that plenty of Christians (and Jews) would support the death penalty.
Thanks for reading.
Here is an interesting essay on the subject of the Bible's teaching re pro-choice v pro-life, also with plenty of quotes.
What Does the Bible Say about Abortion?
https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2022/09/84505/
Author: David Novak, the J. Richard and Dorothy Shiff Chair of Jewish Studies as Professor of the Study of Religion and Professor of Philosophy at the University of Toronto.
@Dinepo: Ah yes, Exodus, the part where is say you can murder someone who causes an incidental premature birth. Perfectly in line with the commandment against murder. Oh, and let's not overlook the misogyny of the husband getting restitution, and not the hurt wife.
Delete22 “If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely[e] but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. 23 But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.
BTW: funny that Judaism has the exact same Exodus in the Thora and concludes that abortion is just fine.
Hence my comment that the text is vague.
I'm not interesting in debating religion. I just want to point out that the enormous variety in teachings in christianity (and judaism when it comes to exodus) shows that most of those beliefs are mere interpretations of the text in the Bible, and therefore can not be the absolute moral truth. It's fine people believe it, but they should acknowledge that that's their choice and that many other interpretations are not only possible, but exist and are believed as well.
@Nepkarel - Obviously you shouldn't debate it, because your arguments are a mess. Definition of murder, you should understand that. Misogyny? Ok, the point was how the fetus was viewed... clearly as a life. Whether any random religion actually follows what's in writing, has no bearing on what the writing actually says when it's clear. Police don't follow the speed limit... so therefore the speed limit sign is open to interpretation and not clear? Not really a logical conclusion.
Delete"BTW: funny that Judaism has the exact same Exodus in the Thora and concludes that abortion is just fine."
DeleteFrom aish.com:
The Orthodox Union (The Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America ) is unable to either mourn or celebrate the news reports of the U.S. Supreme Court’s likely overturning of Roe v Wade. We cannot support absolute bans on abortion—at any time point in a pregnancy—that would not allow access to abortion in lifesaving situations. Similarly, we cannot support legislation that permits “abortion on demand”—at any time point in a pregnancy—and does not confine abortion to situations in which medical (including mental health) professionals affirm that carrying the pregnancy to term poses real risk to the life of the mother.
The traditional Jewish view of abortion does not fit conveniently into either “pro-life” of “pro-choice” camps in the abortion debate. Judaism neither bans abortion completely, nor does it sanction indiscriminate abortion "on demand."
https://aish.com/abortion-in-jewish-law
from chabad.org:
Judaism and Abortion:
The Jewish Approach to Abortion in Short:
-Under normal circumstances it is forbidden to take the life of an unborn child, and it may be akin to murder (depending on the stage of pregnancy and birth, see footnote11*).
Thanks for reading:
-As long as the unborn remains a fetus, it does not have a status of personhood equal to its mother, and therefore may be sacrificed to save the life of the mother.
-In any case where abortion may be necessary, it is of paramount importance to consult halachic and medical experts as soon as possible.
*footnote 11:
Ending a viable life after 30 days since birth is considered “certain murder.” After 6 months of pregnancy, when the fetus may be viable, it is considered “possible murder,” and it is permitted to abort only when the mother’s life is endangered, as the fetus is classified as a rodef. Between 40 days and 6 months of pregnancy, the fetus is considered a “developing life.” Before 40 days it is considered “potential life” (which is why wasting seed is also forbidden). Aborting during these last two time periods may be permitted under certain circumstances that override “developing life” and “potential life”—as always, an expert Rabbi needs to be consulted.
full article: https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/529077/jewish/Judaism-and-Abortion.htm
Thanks for adding footnote 11, confirming my point.
DeleteWhether any random religion actually follows what's in writing, has no bearing on what the writing actually says when it's clear.
You're confirming that most religious texts are unclear, therefore open for debate, and therefor mere interpretation of mortals. And therefore NOT the undoubted word of god.
Police don't follow the speed limit... so therefore the speed limit sign is open to interpretation and not clear? Not really a logical conclusion.
You are ignoring that there are well established rules exempting the police from a lot of rules. This makes the police speeding under certain circumstances entirely legal.
However, on a related but separate note, the police often don't follow those rules, and somehow Americans refuse to hold the police responsible for their misbehavior.
Some crimes are so heinous that death is the only suitable punishment. BUT...
ReplyDeleteThe death penalty is not just as punishment. Think of a beloved dog who, escaping the fence, goes a mauls two children to death. The dog would be put down, NOT because we were punishing it, but because we can take no chances when the god, if it lives, may kill again.
Same with come criminals. They are such a massive danger to society that we are "putting them down" because anything less might allow them to commit further crimes of a heinous nature. For all we know, if we gave such a criminal life in prison, a future governor or president might pardon him...or commute his sentence.
So we take out of the realm of possibility.
HOWEVER, the death penalty is so poorly administered--I think the average wait time between conviction and execution is around 19 YEARS--that being sentenced to death is almost like life in prison. It shouldn't be. When a person is convicted (and I'm talking about with incontrovertible evidence--e.g., a confession, a video, DNA, etc.--that person should have one year to put their affairs in order, then they should be executed.
If we don't have incontrovertible evidence, then life in prison it is.
But if you are sentenced to death, there should be no appeal except to innocence. That is, no arguing that such and such might have been a biased juror. No claims that some document was wrongly signed, etc.
That being said, I have to agree that there is the very real danger that a child rapists may feel forced to kill the child, since he might very well be given the death penalty otherwise.
"The dog would be put down, NOT because we were punishing it, but because we can take no chances when the god, if it lives, may kill again."
DeleteHmmm, a parapraxis, perhaps?
to the confused senator ... if God can rehabilitate them ... well let's send them to Him ... no I am not for death. death is too short ... let them live in a living hell then die
ReplyDeleteIf killing is wrong, then the state should not kill either.
ReplyDeleteThe only problem with the death penalty is that it takes so long for the sentence to be executed. You wait for years and years on 'death row' for it to happen. It should be done much sooner, like months.
ReplyDeleteBut the death penalty steals $50,000 or more every year for decades from a for profit prison. That's anti-business, money that won't trickle down to the poor.
ReplyDeletexoxoxoBruce
Depending on who pays for the 'for profit' prison to house an inmate, having long term inmates could be a profit center, and a reason for the 'for profit' prison to lobby for longer sentences.
DeleteIf the death penalty is a possibility, it gives the rapist a reason to kill the victim. What have they got to lose?
ReplyDelete