Bush Approves Execution Of Army Private

[XIX]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1611942' date='Jul 29 2008, 06:34 PM']Justice in human relations is most certainly a Christian duty, and this includes retributive justice.[/quote]
Well, doesn't that refer to justice in terms of treating people equitably? I don't think "just punishment" is the same thing.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='XIX' post='1611954' date='Jul 29 2008, 03:42 PM']Well, doesn't that refer to justice in terms of treating people equitably? I don't think "just punishment" is the same thing.[/quote]
The virtue of justice, which one must practice if he is to achieve salvation, includes retributive justice.

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='StColette' post='1611953' date='Jul 29 2008, 05:42 PM']Why do I see this being moved to the debate table lol?[/quote]

[Brother Adam]

I am more conflicted about the death penalty today than I used to be. My change of heart came after hearing several testimonies of death penalty conversions to Catholicism. Those who had been on death row for years, and were ministered to by Catholics in prison and who converted. If their execution was carried out quickly, they would probably end up in hell. Combining that with Catholic theology and Balthasar's philosophy I am straddling the fence on many executions. If it were up to me I would probably stay the execution of anyone who is clearly no longer violent in prison and keep them there for life without the possibility of parole. As it is the civil (or in this case military) authority has spoken and has rendered a just punishment for his crimes and find no fault in carrying out that punishment.

[CatherineM]

All it took for me was attending an execution.

[CatherineM]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1611878' date='Jul 29 2008, 04:12 PM']I would nuance this by saying that a Catholic can oppose the application of the death penalty in particular cases, but that it is not possible for a Catholic to oppose the death penalty [i]per se[/i], because the use of the death penalty by the proper civil authorities in capital cases is part of the natural moral law and divine revelation.[/quote]

I guess I am mistaken about Pope John Paul's opposition to the death penalty. Was he only against it in certain cases rather than being opposed to it for every US execution? I guess I got the wrong impression because he sent letters to governors for every execution.

[kafka]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1611826' date='Jul 29 2008, 04:45 PM']Another topic to go around and around with. The CCC allows for capital punishment in certain situations. Reasonable people can disagree as to whether this case, or any case of capital punishment in the US, meets the CCC guidelines. I would hope that eventhough the CCC allows for capital punishment, that we could all recognize that being opposed to the death penalty is also allowed for Catholics since John Paul II was opposed to capital punishment.

Bottom line is that the authority and responsibility of this final decision lay in the President's hands, and he has exercised that authority as his conscience has allowed. All we can do is pray for this condemned man's soul, and for his victims, their families, and for his family as well.[/quote]
JPII was not opposed to the death penalty. He suggested that the world should move towards an ideal society in which there would be no killing. But this idea is of the decision of the temporal prudential order and is fallible. The Church has infallibly and non-infalliby taught that the death penalty can be used by proper lawful authority. The death penalty is not intrinsically evil, therefore when applying the basic principles of Catholic ethics (which I will do below) it defaults the the third font of circumstance/or consequences.

[quote name='aalpha1989' post='1611840' date='Jul 29 2008, 04:52 PM']I don't understand why you would kill him when there is obviously another choice available. I am very very sorry to say (no sarcasm, I really am sorry), but that is not a pro-life position. Capital punishment IS a life issue. It should be a last resort for the protection of life. Killing this guy cannot bring his victims back.

Yes, the Church allows for use of the death penalty when [i]necessary[/i]. In this case it is not necessary, it is just to make the victims and their families feel like some kind of revenge has been taken. Capital punishment should not be for vengence (because that's what it is in most cases, including this one).[/quote]
There could be multiple just and good consequences of the death penalty beyond the peace of the families. It is not a matter of when the death penalty is necessary it is a matter of whether or not the good consequences outweigh the bad consequences as I will demonstrate below:

Lets apply the principles of basic Catholic ethics, namely the three fonts of moralty to this decision of the President. All three fonts must be moral in order for the overall act to be moral:

[b]First Font:[/b] intent (also called choice, or the exercise of free will, or purpose)

~Based on the little I read in the articles our President had the good intent and purpose of enacting justice by administering the death penalty upon this person, since he was a serial murderer and rapist, and in the military(the president's responsibility).

[b]Second Font:[/b] the act itself (not the overall act, encompassing all three fonts, but the act narrowly considered, apart from intention and knowledge, apart from circumstance and consequence.

~use of the death penalty by a lawful government is not intrinsically evil therefore the overall morality of the act defaults to the third font (circumstance). (side-note: I think not using the death penalty could theoritically be a sin of omission, since it might be morally necessary out of love of God and neighbor.)

[b]Third Font: [/b] 3. circumstances (i.e. everything else that affects the morality of the overall act, other than the first two fonts). For this font to be good, the good consequences must outweigh the bad consequences.

~this is where we enter the realm of the prudential order which is fallible. The President must decide whether or not the good consequences of the death penalty outweigh the bad circumstances in this particular case. Within this font Catholics may debate whether or not our President acted morally in this situation, but they may not disagree with Church teaching that the death penalty is not intrinsically evil.

Now I am not well versed in law but here are some possible consequences:

Good:
1. Justice and good are upheld in a public way
2. The peace of the victim's families
3. An example and warning to other serial murderers and rapists
4. An example to other members of the military who should be given stricter judgment since they are called to defend the country.
5. The possible repentance of the rapist/murderer because of looming death.
6. A positive example of justice to other nations

Bad:
1. The shortening of a man's life.
2. The shortening of time of his possible repentence
3. The loss of his possible good use to society by performing in house services to the government.

There may be other consequences that surface in time,

In conclusion based on the little I know, it seems to me that the President acted with moral certitude that the good consequences outweighed the bad, therefore making the overall act moral.

Edited July 29, 2008 by kafka

[Didymus]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1611878' date='Jul 29 2008, 05:12 PM']I would nuance this by saying that a Catholic can oppose the application of the death penalty in particular cases, but that it is not possible for a Catholic to oppose the death penalty [i]per se[/i], because the use of the death penalty by the proper civil authorities in capital cases is part of the natural moral law and divine revelation.[/quote]

but it's even more complicated than that.. I support the death penalty as a last resort within those communities that do not possess the means to control someone dangerous to society.

I am, however, opposed to any and all applications of the death penalty by the U.S., as it is never necessary to take a life here in order to cut one off from society for the rest of their life.

This action by President Bush is unfortunate, as he makes himself out to be one who is pro-life, and yet he turns out to be one who merely opposes injustices against lives deemed 'worthy' to defend, and not those guilty of crimes as well.

[kafka]

[quote name='Didymus' post='1612002' date='Jul 29 2008, 06:42 PM']I am, however, opposed to any and all applications of the death penalty by the U.S., as it is never necessary to take a life here in order to cut one off from society for the rest of their life.

This action by President Bush is unfortunate, as he makes himself out to be one who is pro-life, and yet he turns out to be one who merely opposes injustices against lives deemed 'worthy' to defend, and not those guilty of crimes as well.[/quote]
please read my post above.

[KnightofChrist]

President Bush is well within his God given rights as leader of this nation to carry out the death penalty on a person guilty of crimes as this many as guilty. His approval is not illegal nor is it immoral.

Edited July 29, 2008 by KnightofChrist

[kafka]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1612007' date='Jul 29 2008, 06:52 PM']President Bush is well within his God given rights as leader of this nation to carry out the death penalty on a person guilty of crimes as this many as guilty. His approval is not illegal nor is it immoral.[/quote]
I dont understand what you mean by that. His act is either moral or immoral. Even though it is his legal right to administer the death penalty in this situation, it could still theoretically be immoral if it is done with bad intentions and or the bad consequences outweigh the good consequences.

[CatherineM]

[quote name='kafka' date='Jul 29 2008, 05:40 PM' post='1612000']
JPII was not opposed to the death penalty. He suggested that the world should move towards an ideal society in which there would be no killing. But this idea is of the decision of the temporal prudential order and is fallible. The Church has infallibly and non-infalliby taught that the death penalty can be used by proper lawful authority. The death penalty is not intrinsically evil, therefore when applying the basic principles of Catholic ethics (which I will do below) it defaults the the third font of circumstance/or consequences.


I'm really not trying to be argumentative, I am really trying to understand. If JPII wasn't against the death penalty, then why did he request repeatedly that governors not sign death warrants and instead commute sentences?

[Didymus]

[quote name='kafka' post='1612006' date='Jul 29 2008, 06:51 PM']please read my post above.[/quote]

added to the circumstances ought to be the U.S.' ability to retain an individual for the duration of their life and keep them separated from society for the protection of the society. This is a huge circumstance that many seem to overlook. If it were taken into account, a life can be spared.

[Didymus]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1612007' date='Jul 29 2008, 06:52 PM']President Bush is well within his God given rights as leader of this nation to carry out the death penalty on a person guilty of crimes as this many as guilty. His approval is not illegal nor is it immoral.[/quote]

are you saying this, or did the Vicar of Christ come out and speak infallibly on this particular instance himself?

Edited July 29, 2008 by Didymus

[Deb]

Did anyone listen to the gospel reading we just had about the wheat and the weeds? God is patient. He does not want any of his children to lose their souls and if there is any chance of redemption by one who commits evil he is willing to give them time. His time is not the same as ours. I can only think of myself. If my life had ended anytime between the ages of 17 and 51, I would probably be burning in hell. The Lord gave me all the time in the world to hear his voice. I think all children of God deserve the same.

In this case, this man is no threat and so killing him twenty years after the crime, one he pled guilty to, is no more than a case of vengence by man. Murder just because you can.

Then again, Bush never met a criminal he wasn't willing to let die, some he has even mocked first.

[kafka]

[i]I'm really not trying to be argumentative, I am really trying to understand. If JPII wasn't against the death penalty, then why did he request repeatedly that governors not sign death warrants and instead commute sentences?[/i]

I didnt think you were, but there is the danger that people misunderstand his actions to think that the death penalty is the same as the negative precept (thou shalt not kill) and hence falling into error. Those requests were of the prudential order, are fallible and could very well have been wrong. I really dont know why he did it, I would have to study each particular case.

Edited July 29, 2008 by kafka

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='kafka' post='1612010' date='Jul 29 2008, 05:57 PM']I dont understand what you mean by that. His act is either moral or immoral. Even though it is his legal right to administer the death penalty in this situation, it could still theoretically be immoral if it is done with bad intentions and or the bad consequences outweigh the good consequences.[/quote]

If one accepts the premise that the solider is guilty of the crimes which he as been charged and found guilty of, then the President as a representative of the United States is well within his rights to carry out justice called for by the military court. Also, it could be considered a good and moral decision if done in a just manner it would be backed by both the law of the Untied States and of God.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Didymus' post='1612015' date='Jul 29 2008, 06:08 PM']are you saying this, or did the Vicar of Christ come out and speak infallibly on this particular instance himself?[/quote]

The Vicar of Christ has spoken through the Saints and His Church, who teach that governments have a right to implement the use of the death penalty for unjust crimes against society, as President and a leader of this nation that duty can fall on the man that sits in that office.

Edited July 29, 2008 by KnightofChrist

[Deb]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1612020' date='Jul 29 2008, 07:12 PM']If one accepts the premise that the solider is guilty of the crimes which he as been charged and found guilty of, then the President as a representative of the United States is well within his rights to carry out justice called for by the military court. Also, it could be considered a good and moral decision if done in a just manner it would be backed by both the law of the Untied States and of God.[/quote]


Do you really think that God backs man killing each other under the guise of punishment? Just because something is legal, doesn't mean it should continue. Just like abortion. Protection of life is from conception to natural death. Capital punishment is just another piece of a culture of death.

[url="http://www.usccb.org/sdwp/national/penaltyofdeath.pdf"]http://www.usccb.org/sdwp/national/penaltyofdeath.pdf[/url]

[kafka]

[quote name='Didymus' post='1612013' date='Jul 29 2008, 07:06 PM']added to the circumstances ought to be the U.S.' ability to retain an individual for the duration of their life and keep them separated from society for the protection of the society. This is a huge circumstance that many seem to overlook. If it were taken into account, a life can be spared.[/quote]
maybe, of course mercy is greater than justice, but then again the leader of a nation has a grave destiny to make judgments that may benefit his people. There isnt a whole lot of fear of God in our secular society, so maybe that could be another good consequence.

[quote name='Didymus' post='1612015' date='Jul 29 2008, 07:08 PM']are you saying this, or did the Vicar of Christ come out and speak infallibly on this particular instance himself?[/quote]
There are three ways in which the Sacred Magisterium may teach infallibly:

1. Papal Infallibility
2. Solemn Definitions of Ecumenical Councils
3. Universal Magisterium

In my opinion that the death penalty is not instrinsically evil falls under the the infallible Teaching of the Universal Magisterium (I will expound if you wish)