Death penalty off the table for Texas shooter

[Neph]

How do you figure?

“love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (Matthew 5:44)

There's plenty of others like turning the other cheek etc. etc.

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

“love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (Matthew 5:44)

There's plenty of others like turning the other cheek etc. etc.

Romans 13:4 For the one in authority is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God's servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.

The verses you are referring to are showing a Christian how he should handle adversity. He should not seek retribution. That is for the Lord. As seen in Romans, God uses "the state" to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.

 

[spin]

I don't care if they don't understand the consequences.... they committed a heinous crime and are dangerous to society. Murderers need to be put down regardless of age. That simple enough?

That doesn't make any case for the death penalty for minors.

 

[IloveTHIS]

Maybe I'm alone in this, but personally if I was facing 20+ years, I would 100% unquestionably rather die. To me, letting an asshole like that pass away is getting off easy. Let him waste away behind bars for the rest of his mortal life. Put him in gen pop where he might be around some family members of the victims. Let him live through the hell the victims felt, every day for the rest of his days.

 

[SmilinDesperado]

I'm not fit to judge anyone to death, and neither is anybody else.

Yeah, I agree with this. This piece of shit obviously deserves to die, but I don't believe it is up to me, or the state to take that life.
I would much rather banishment from society.
Ship them off to an island with other murderers and let them fend for themselves

 

[Neph]

Yeah, I agree with this. This piece of shit obviously deserves to die, but I don't believe it is up to me, or the state to take that life.
I would much rather banishment from society.
Ship them off to an island with other murderers and let them fend for themselves

And set up cameras there to livestream it, a pay per view kind of thing. Think of the profit!

 

[InternetHero]

No, it doesn't describe all world governments. America is not a government of God, it's a government of The People. It is explicitly secular, which is ironically the only way to secure freedom of and from religion to such a successful degree that our disagreements are mostly minor. American Christians are to render unto man's government what is man's government's, and give to God what is God's. God's is judgment and vengeance. This is foundational to Christian belief.

Really now.

It does not take long in reading the Declaration of Independence to get to "Laws of Nature and of Nature's God," perhaps it was the world's worst typo.

Then again, it comes up in the very next paragraph as "Creator."

Expressively Diest perhaps, or perhaps reverent to all believers, as Amendment number 1 in the Bill of Rights is rumored to say of religion not to establish a state religion or... - or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

Why are you arguing in bad faith? No pun intended.

You know specifically the "Founders" were referencing and deferential to the "God of Abraham." and knew that most of their citizens were overwhelmingly Christian, citizens they by in large cared for and wanted to protect, despite their own many flaws of the day.

 

[SmilinDesperado]

And set up cameras there to livestream it, a pay per view kind of thing. Think of the profit!

Why not?
Make those fuckers have some use for society.

Housing and feeding them for 40 or 50 years doesn't make much sense.

 

[nhbbear]

Hope it’s a firing squad

 

[InternetHero]

Most of the Bible can be seen that way as Christians are called to humble themselves. Something I'm admittedly VERY bad at in argument

You're not arguing with posters who want to understand anything about the scripture.

They have completely rejected your religion my friend, and are looking explicitly at how to "refute" the words and logic without understanding the basic philosophy, much deeper philosophy therein, history, foundations in all culture, morality, and perhaps in life itself.

All you are to them is a narrow minded zealot who wants to take away "their freedoms" or stone all the gays or basically to create an American Taliban. Most do not even know what they are doing or talking about.

They do not understand you, and do not want to understand you, they want to vilify you for the Cause Celebre at hand.

Mathew 7:6 comes to mind, I plead, please do not argue the spiritual against a secular mob, that is sadly a losing proposition and bound to make you angry and frustrated.

1 Cor 9:24 Do you not know that all the runners in a stadium compete, but only one receives the prize? So run to win.

Or for the secular minded, let us "Let it go."



Confession - I have never seen "Frozen," something I should probably do to relate to a lot of those who have.

 

[Fawlty]

Really now.

It does not take long in reading the Declaration of Independence to get to "Laws of Nature and of Nature's God," perhaps it was the world's worst typo.

Then again, it comes up in the very next paragraph as "Creator."

Expressively Diest perhaps, or perhaps reverent to all believers, as Amendment number 1 in the Bill of Rights is rumored to say of religion not to establish a state religion or... - or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

Why are you arguing in bad faith? No pun intended.

You know specifically the "Founders" were referencing and deferential to the "God of Abraham." and knew that most of their citizens were overwhelmingly Christian, citizens they by in large cared for and wanted to protect, despite their own many flaws of the day.

It doesn't matter that the founders professed to believe in the god of Abraham. It's not in there. Freedom of (and from) religion is. Creator is without respect to any religion. Nature's God is ambiguous at best, a caveat to the Laws of Nature. It was a very progressive and tolerant document for its time, to absolutely understate it. It has since been interpreted to be secular as well. And you earned a Go Fuck Yourself for your bad faith stuff. Almost an Eat Shit, Motherfucker. You're going to stop pulling that nonsense on me. You're also going to apologize to me.

 

[InternetHero]

It doesn't matter that the founders professed to believe in the god of Abraham. It's not in there. Freedom of (and from) religion is. Creator is without respect to any religion. Nature's God is ambiguous at best, a caveat to the Laws of Nature. It was a very progressive and tolerant document for its time, to absolutely understate it. It has since been interpreted to be secular as well. And you earned a Go Fuck Yourself for your bad faith stuff. Almost an Eat Shit, Motherfucker. You're going to stop pulling that nonsense on me. You're also going to apologize to me.

On the one hand you say it does not matter, when you know the Founders did believe so... we now have their explicit intent.

On the other hand, you say it does not matter because the language is also ambiguous, but ambiguous to protect religion.... (Christian sects being the explicit historical and living representation of their representatives, the vast majority of whom were Christian and were escaping the Reformation woes of Christian Europe, not Istanbul, or Tlaloc) we now have their explicit intent on religious grounds per Amendment 1 of the Constitution.

I would add, religion which they almost uniformly respected and said so, even for those who did not believe such as Jefferson.

If they were not referencing the God of Abraham, which was about their only point of reference at that time, and the established following of most of their subjects.

They Capitalized God, and mentioned Creator, you know they are not talking about Gaia, you also know they are talking about John Locke and not the Flying Spaghetti Monster or Ehecatai.

- God is explicitly stated and capitalized.

- Creator is explicitly stated and capitalized.

- with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence

Powerful stuff. I do not think they mean to reference the abstract since they go out of their way to respect the guidance, existence, and good nature of a creator, based on John Locke and what was then the cornerstone, if you will, of all Western thought for the past 1,500 to 1,600 odd years.

Now as for your perhaps looking through an emotional lens:

I can "go fuck myself" and you "demand an apology."

If I was wrong I would apologize, and have before on this forum, I am not here for face saving rituals or team-honor purposes.

Many speak of riled jimmies around the internet, so I ask in what is good faith, are you really so upset and have to convoluted so much what is by intent of the:

Philosopher who founded it, the men who wrote it, the people they proposed to serve, the language they chose to use, and not only referencing God based on the context of all those people and principles, but choosing to personify Him and even his works with deference?

I don't think that's Gaia, and based on the insults and outrage, that looks more like emotion than ration.

 

[Islam Imamate]

The authority to rule in America is granted to the State by the PEOPLE. It's the very beginning of the Constitution for fuck's sake. The rights of the individual are said to be granted by God. You are simply dead wrong here. You owe yourself a Civics class. As soon as possible.

The protection to society comes in the form of incarceration. Murdering them is excessive. Again, we don't "put people down." People are not dogs. People have inalienable rights.

I don't think the verse is referring to a theocratic government though, just government in general.

Romans 13:4 For the one in authority is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God's servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.

Basically, those in authority are God's instruments for bringing punishment against wrong doers whether they know it or not since they can only exist and possess power according to His will. In the context of this argument a Christian would be against a personal act of vengeance against the shooter but not the state applying capital punishment in the interest of law and order.

 

[tonni]

So this fat sack of shit was getting laid and still wanted to kill people? Guess it's back to the drawing board for me, that kills my whole argument.

The problem has never been "not getting laid". Look at the demographic of school/mass shooters and you'll find one thing in common and it's not not getting laid.

 

[AVX]

The problem has never been "not getting laid". Look at the demographic of school/mass shooters and you'll find one thing in common and it's not not getting laid.

It's The Whites!

 

[HIMBOB]

What was his motivation?

 

[tonni]

It's The Whites!

No. That's not the one defining characteristic.

 

[WTF2008]

Executing minors is a barbaric practice and you should be glad it's off the table.

If he is not eligible for parole for 40 years, how about waiting for, say, 35 years before having this discussion? It It should depend on the long-term impact for the surviving victims and the conduct of the perpetrator in those 35 years.

Is this a serious post?
Crime done. Punishment should be harsh and immediate. It's not like there's a doubt about who did it.

 

[Thai Domi]

“love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (Matthew 5:44)

There's plenty of others like turning the other cheek etc. etc.

Both taken out of context. Those references are about the conduct of Christ's disciples in the face of persecution; they have nothing to do with capital punishment. In fact, God's redemptive plan depended on the death penalty.

Also, here's Paul:

Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is God's minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God's minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.

- Romans 13:1-4

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

The problem has never been "not getting laid". Look at the demographic of school/mass shooters and you'll find one thing in common and it's not not getting laid.

Fatherlessness?