Tenerife Killer - Suitable punishment?

Donatello

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Then you have a hard time with one of the tenets of the Bible. No one is saying that we should let people off scot free, but there is a huge jump between imprisonment (and we can argue if this should be corrective or punitive in nature, or maybe both) and the death penalty. I can't say for sure what Jesus would have done (though I believe there is sufficient evidence to say that he was not in favour of retributive violence), so I err on the side of caution and say that this person should be locked up for ever and a day.

No I don't think so. I'm with the teaching of my Church on this one, and the Church teaches with the authority of Christ Himself. That is what we Catholics believe. The death penalty can be used in limited circumstances when the criteria are met.

I'm not actually sure what Jesus would recommend in this instance. I'd love to know. What we do have is the teaching of the Church. How that could be applied in this instance, I do not know. We'd need to consult Catholic theologians for an opinion.

My concern would be that he would be detained for a while and then released only to do it again.

Meanwhile (and this is not directed at you), I have a very hard time listening to pro-aborts defend this headhunter's right to life and at the same time hold to the woman's 'right' to kill her unborn baby. It's just callous and heartless beyond belief. It is what I called false compassion of the worst kind.

virmilitaris

Donatello you do realise that most people here couldn't care less what your church says about anything? Why do you insist on quoting from it's documents like its some sort of authority ? Its white noise to non-catholics and atheists alike.

Donatello

virmilitaris wrote: »

Donatello you do realise that most people here couldn't care less what your church says about anything? Why do you insist on quoting from it's documents like its some sort of authority ? Its white noise to non-catholics and atheists alike.

Surely in a tolerant, diverse, and pluralist place like boards.ie, all voices can be heard and lsitened to? Unless it is all just empty talk. :eek:

virmilitaris

Donatello wrote: »

Surely in a tolerant, diverse, and pluralist place like boards.ie, all voices can be heard and lsitened to? Unless it is all just empty talk. :eek:

That's not my point. I'm not suggesting you're not allowed to say what you want, I'm asking you why you continually quote from a source which means nothing to most people.

If I, for example, started arguing in this thread and started using some guys opinion of the Koran or some Buddhist documents as my argument would it have any meaning to you ?

Nobody cares what your churches position is. If you're going to quote from the bible then that's obviously going to resonate well with the Christians here but quoting from the Catholic Church has no weight with the vast majority of people here. You might as well be talking about Jim next door's opinion of what the bible says.

Benny_Cake

Festus wrote: »

It could be argued that something capable of an act as heinous as this is not a person and therefore its life has no protection in Spanish law.

This is one of the sickest things I've read here. Who is it that gets to decide who is a human being then?

georgieporgy

virmilitaris wrote: »

That's not my point. I'm not suggesting you're not allowed to say what you want, I'm asking you why you continually quote from a source which means nothing to most people.

If I, for example, started arguing in this thread and started using some guys opinion of the Koran or some Buddhist documents as my argument would it have any meaning to you ?

Nobody cares what your churches position is. If you're going to quote from the bible then that's obviously going to resonate well with the Christians here but quoting from the Catholic Church has no weight with the vast majority of people here. You might as well be talking about Jim next door's opinion of what the bible says.

Are you suggesting there should be a Catholic forum for Catholics? The majority of the Irish population is RC so it wouldn't be a bad idea seeing as the aethiests and non rc christians are not interested in hearing what catholics (and their church) have to say.

Up to now it's only catholics that have been calling for a catholic forum. But support from any source ,no matter how bigoted, is welcome.

virmilitaris

I'm not saying he has no right to an opinion. I'm asking him why he is quoting other peoples opinions as some sort of authority. He is offering the opinions of one church as evidence for his position. He makes a post, someone points out some part of that post and he comes back quoting some mundane page of the big book of catholicism like that's somehow proving his point.

I'm just asking him why, not saying he shouldn't.

Donatello

georgieporgy wrote: »

Are you suggesting there should be a Catholic forum for Catholics? The majority of the Irish population is RC so it wouldn't be a bad idea seeing as the aethiests and non rc christians are not interested in hearing what catholics (and their church) have to say.

Up to now it's only catholics that have been calling for a catholic forum. But support from any source ,no matter how bigoted, is welcome.

I agree. The atheists tear us to pieces and the Christians tell us we're un-Biblical. Soon we're going to have to apply for minority/persecuted status.

But on a serious note, I think there should be a Catholic forum, moderated by Catholics*, just as the Christian forum is moderated by Christians, and the atheist forum is moderated by atheists.

* Catholics are Christians btw.

Anyway, Virmil asked why I invoked the authority of my Church, and my answer is because, since I believe it is authoritative, I believe that it is worth invoking. The Catholic Church has the most solid and thought out moral and theological teachings, a vast body of doctrine stretching right back to the beginning of the Church. I've said before that the Church does not absolutely forbid recourse to the death penalty.

I cannot speak for the Church - I speak only for myself. I do not know if the death penalty could be justified in this instance using Catholic teaching. I think there is a good case for it, but I'm not sure.

old hippy

Donatello wrote: »

Frankly, I am not interested in conversing with those who, on the one hand, get warm fuzzies about murderous psychopaths, and on the other, condemn unborn babies to death in the name of 'choice.' This is false compassion of the very worst kind.

You're being disingenuous. Nobody is getting warm fuzzies about murder. But abortion is the termination of a clump of non sentient cells, a bit different.

I think you're just not interested in conversing with those who don't hold sway with your vengeance and retribution meted out to the mentally ill.

And again, I ask you if this mentally ill man is possessed by demonic forces as you claim; then surely his actions were not under his control and he was, indeed, innocent? Your execution decree would surely then be murder under your "killing of the innocent" line.

old hippy

Donatello wrote: »

But on a serious note, I think there should be a Catholic forum, moderated by Catholics*, just as the Christian forum is moderated by Christians, and the atheist forum is moderated by atheists.

I thought this thread was open to everybody?

Perhaps it should be moderated by those with no bias whatsoever*, as opposed to it being an exclusive club?


* I'm sure it already is, mind

old hippy

georgieporgy wrote: »

My vote? I'd set him free but insist he go immediately to the People's Republic of China for a 4 week vacation.

What's China got to do with it? Is it because they execute the mentally ill as well?

virmilitaris

Donatello wrote: »

Anyway, Virmil asked why I invoked the authority of my Church, and my answer is because, since I believe it is authoritative, I believe that it is worth invoking. The Catholic Church has the most solid and thought out moral and theological teachings, a vast body of doctrine stretching right back to the beginning of the Church.

My point is very simple. You are having a discussion with other christians and atheists here. The doctrine of your church means nothing to us.

When christians argue with atheists on this forum they usually don't just quote the bible because they know it's not evidence to the atheists. They actually try to argue their points not just copy and paste from some holy book.

thebullkf

old hippy wrote: »

Excuse me but how dare you? You cannot compare mentally ill people with paedophiles.

How can the mentally ill be responsible for their actions? Do they even know they are doing bad things?

Which reminds me, is the man mentally ill or possessed by demons?

Either way, he has no real control of his actions and is therefore innocent in a sense.

i must say i find this thread very interesting, as a non practicing catholic i find your posting to be evasive and a little bit inflammatory old hippy. Forgive me if i'm wrong this is my opinion only.

You seem intent on asking many questions in an attempt to pigeon hole donatello, yet not providing your own views

Moving goalposts spring to mind..

old hippy

thebullkf wrote: »

i must say i find this thread very interesting, as a non practicing catholic i find your posting to be evasive and a little bit inflammatory old hippy. Forgive me if i'm wrong this is my opinion only.

You seem intent on asking many questions in an attempt to pigeon hole donatello, yet not providing your own views

Moving goalposts spring to mind..

I've provided my views; I find murder to be barbaric, as committed by an individual or a state. I do not support the death penalty and I find the clamouring for the murder of a mentally ill person in very questionable taste.

JimiTime

old hippy wrote: »

I've provided my views; I find murder to be barbaric,

As do most people. The issue is capital punishment though and you correlating it with being murderous.

old hippy

JimiTime wrote: »

As do most people. The issue is capital punishment though and you correlating it with being murderous.

The taking of a human life is murder, that's pretty evident. There is no case to be had for state sponsored murder.

PDN

Donatello wrote: »

Those who are executed by the state are by definition not innocent, hence it is not murder. Murder is killing of the innocent. Murder is unlawful. This is what you have to work with. Stop wriggling.

So when the English State, under Queen Elizabeth I, executed Jesuit priests, it was not (by your own definitions) murder?

This thread reminds me of the quote by Orrin Hatch, Republican senator for Utah, “Capital punishment is our society's recognition of the sanctity of human life.”

POINTBREAK

old hippy wrote: »

I've provided my views; I find murder to be barbaric, as committed by an individual or a state. I do not support the death penalty and I find the clamouring for the murder of a mentally ill person in very questionable taste.

-
Just as a talking point re anti capital punishment.
Say there wasn't just this one Guy in Tenerife but 100 of them and they were outside your door. Would you retain your opposition to the death penalty or would you kill them if you could to protect yourself and others?

thebullkf

virmilitaris wrote: »

That's not my point. I'm not suggesting you're not allowed to say what you want, I'm asking you why you continually quote from a source which means nothing to most people.

If I, for example, started arguing in this thread and started using some guys opinion of the Koran or some Buddhist documents as my argument would it have any meaning to you ?

Nobody cares what your churches position is. If you're going to quote from the bible then that's obviously going to resonate well with the Christians here but quoting from the Catholic Church has no weight with the vast majority of people here. You might as well be talking about Jim next door's opinion of what the bible says.

eh..just because you don't, doesn't infer nobody does.

if you don't care, why post here?

its poster/posts s like yourself/yours that turn people away from debates such as this. Its insulting tbh.

do you post in the LBGT forum deriding people for their 'position' ?

after all the majority of people aren't LBGT, and has no "weight with the vast majority here.." ...

Its pathetic actually.

Keylem

old hippy wrote: »

You're being disingenuous. Nobody is getting warm fuzzies about murder. But abortion is the termination of a clump of non sentient cells, a bit different.

I think you're just not interested in conversing with those who don't hold sway with your vengeance and retribution meted out to the mentally ill.

And again, I ask you if this mentally ill man is possessed by demonic forces as you claim; then surely his actions were not under his control and he was, indeed, innocent? Your execution decree would surely then be murder under your "killing of the innocent" line.

The aborted foetal images I've seen didn't look like a clump of cells, they were fully formed tiny babies with nervous systems and a brain, and could feel pain.

"It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."

-Blessed Mother Teresa-

thebullkf

old hippy wrote: »

I've provided my views; I find murder to be barbaric, as committed by an individual or a state. I do not support the death penalty and I find the clamouring for the murder of a mentally ill person in very questionable taste.

i find murder distasteful as you do.

its our differing views on what constitutes Murder that divides us.

dvpower

POINTBREAK wrote: »

-
Just as a talking point re anti capital punishment.
Say there wasn't just this one Guy in Tenerife but 100 of them and they were outside your door. Would you retain your opposition to the death penalty or would you kill them if you could to protect yourself and others?

I think you're mixing up the death penalty with the right to self defense. This individual has been caught and is no threat to anyone so long as he is secured.
Killing him would only save money (and probably not because of the cost of the legal process), not lives.

Would supporting the death penalty save you from 100 mentally ill people gathering at your door?

thebullkf

PDN wrote: »

So when the English State, under Queen Elizabeth I, executed Jesuit priests, it was not (by your own definitions) murder?

This thread reminds me of the quote by Orrin Hatch, Republican senator for Utah, “Capital punishment is our society's recognition of the sanctity of human life.”

why were they executed? Was it lawful in your eyes?

what do you think?

old hippy

POINTBREAK wrote: »

-
Just as a talking point re anti capital punishment.
Say there wasn't just this one Guy in Tenerife but 100 of them and they were outside your door. Would you retain your opposition to the death penalty or would you kill them if you could to protect yourself and others?

Depends on whether they were possessed by demons etc :rolleyes:

prinz

Secure. Mental. Facility. Let him live out his days hammering his head off a padded wall.

old hippy

Keylem wrote: »

The aborted foetal images I've seen didn't look like a clump of cells, they were fully formed tiny babies with nervous systems and a brain, and could feel pain.

"It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."

-Blessed Mother Teresa-

This is not a thread about abortion but we can go down that road, if you really want to.

I don't see what some dead old busybody has to do with anything, btw.

thebullkf

dvpower wrote: »

I think you're mixing up the death penalty with the right to self defense. This individual has been caught and is no threat to anyone so long as he is secured.
Killing him would only save money (and probably not because of the cost of the legal process), not lives.

Would supporting the death penalty save you from 100 mentally ill people gathering at your door?

it seems he has a history of mental problems...i'd wonder was he 'secured' before he was given the opportunity to murder this poor woman...

I mean, lets say he's secured under current law for 20 years for murder. gets out ..murders again...does another 20...gets out..murders again... should we just keep locking these headers up..?

*dunno how old he is btw*

Penn

When I saw this thread title yesterday, I presumed it was an After Hours thread. I can't believe this is being debated on the Christianity forum.

It is never okay to kill another human being. The death penalty should never be an option. He should be held in prison until it can be determined how mentally ill he is, and should probably be put in a mental health facility for the rest of his life.

Putting someone to death because they might try to hurt someone in the future is killing them for something they did not do.

The death penalty is wrong, no matter what the circumstances are.

Laisurg

Bit strange that this is in the christianity forum is it not? strange comments for christians as well, whatever happened to forgiveness and all that? :pac:
But to be honest this guy is a dangerous psychopath and if the option was there i think execution for the sake of preventing any further harm to anyone would be the best option, i normally wouldn't say that but this guy is just demented.

thebullkf

Barrington wrote: »

When I saw this thread title yesterday, I presume it was an After Hours thread. I can't believe this is being debated on the Christianity forum.

It is never okay to kill another human being. The death penalty should never be an option. He should be held in prison until it can be determined how mentally ill he is, and should probably be put in a mental health facility for the rest of his life.

Putting someone to death because they might try to hurt someone in the future is killing them for something they did not do.

The death penalty is wrong, no matter what the circumstances are.

lets assume there is nowhere to hold him. what then?

should someone who's committed a less serious crime be released, to fascilitate his locking up?

who decides which crime deserves more punishment