Jump to content

Does Utah Prefer "Eye for an Eye" Justice?


maklelan

Recommended Posts

According to this article, a man who was sentenced to be executed in Utah will have the option of lethal injection or firing squad, since he was sentenced before 2004, when they removed the latter as an option. According to Amnesty International's death penalty abolition coordinator for Utah, the majority of citizens in the state don't oppose the death penalty for the following reason:

I think in Utah, when it suits their purposes, they go back to the Old Testament and the 'eye for an eye' kind of thing.

I disagree entirely, and I think her opinion is a strikingly uninformed assumption. I also don't like the rhetorical jab of "when it suits their purposes." If scripture has anything to do with it, it's the Book of Mormon that influences that ideology, although my personal opinion is that it's just a product of mid-west conservativism. What do you think?

Link to comment
I think her opinion is a strikingly uninformed assumption. I also don't like the rhetorical jab of "when it suits their purposes." If scripture has anything to do with it, it's the Book of Mormon that influences that ideology, although my personal opinion is that it's just a product of mid-west conservativism. What do you think?

The radical Left have as an article of their faith that those who disagree are both ignorant and have dastardly motivations. The worst sin they can envision is having religious [!!!] motivations for one's political beliefs: witness the silly trial in CA on the subject of Prop 8's constitutionality; most of the published transcripts pointed out the fight over religious motivation of both advocates and voters, as if that were relevant to constitutionality.

Our atheist/agnostic [mostly former Mormon] critics, by and large, appear to fall into the radical Leftist political camp. Why this should be, I have no idea.

This ignorant twit's ill-informed spew is just another in a long line of Leftist/Atheist dribble.

Neither original nor interesting.

Link to comment

I think her opinion is a strikingly uninformed assumption. I also don't like the rhetorical jab of "when it suits their purposes." If scripture has anything to do with it, it's the Book of Mormon that influences that ideology, although my personal opinion is that it's just a product of mid-west conservativism. What do you think?

I take it a step further and say IT IS a product of mid-west conservatism. One of my uncles lives near the prison where the last person died by firing squad and seems disappointed that the days of the firing squad is ending. Now you have to keep in mind that most of my relatives are really into fishing and hunting. I remember a thread that regarded to always going to church on Sundays EXCEPT for the opening Sunday of deer hunting season. You take into account that they always talk about their new rifles and I have no problem in believing that ammunition is part of their food storage. It may be easy to assume that Utah prefers an "eye for an eye" justice.

In my LDS family, it's more about keeping the traditions of your past with the old-west approach. Utah will never really have an issue with the death penalty. My Catholicism obviously has a different spin and I seem to avoid this particular subject with my LDS family and wife.

Link to comment

I think that the death penalty should be enforced fully for capitol crimes (murder, etc...) and also that lethal injection should be abolished. Why make the death penalty seem too "humane"? It should be seen as just as brutal as it is! It is taking a life, I for one would not like to make it too "comfortable" for the public to enforce. We should make it a last resort, but we should not be too squeamish to enforce it when necessary. As far as it being able to deter crime, that is not it's purpose in my opinion. It is punishment, the ultimate punishment and one thing is for sure when it is carried out, there are no repeat offenders.

Link to comment

According to this article, a man who was sentenced to be executed in Utah will have the option of lethal injection or firing squad, since he was sentenced before 2004, when they removed the latter as an option. According to Amnesty International's death penalty abolition coordinator for Utah, the majority of citizens in the state don't oppose the death penalty for the following reason:

I disagree entirely, and I think her opinion is a strikingly uninformed assumption. I also don't like the rhetorical jab of "when it suits their purposes." If scripture has anything to do with it, it's the Book of Mormon that influences that ideology, although my personal opinion is that it's just a product of mid-west conservativism. What do you think?

Well, this is a complete anecdote and may mean nothing at all but....

When I was growing up in Utah I was taught by my step-Dad, as well as some Sunday School teachers that the reason Utah used a firing squad was because Brigham Young taught that a man's blood must literally be spilled on the ground in order for that man/woman to have any hope of forgiveness.

Having now read some of Brigham Young's more bold statements on the matter I can see how this idea gained some traction.

But, to the OP's question: No, I don't believe Utah prefers "eye for an eye" justice and I agree that the reference to the OT shows woeful ignorance on the part of the writer as to theological ideas that heavily influenced early Utah.

Link to comment

An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, leads to a sightless and toothless

world.

An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth prevents you from blinding both eyes and knocking out all teeth of the guy who hurt yours, as well as doing the same to all his family, burning down his house and confiscating his entire property.

An eye for an eye puts a limit on what justice can exact. it really is a good system.

Link to comment
An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth prevents you from blinding both eyes and knocking out all teeth of the guy who hurt yours, as well as doing the same to all his family, burning down his house and confiscating his entire property.

An eye for an eye puts a limit on what justice can exact. it really is a good system.

Glad somebody gets it.

Link to comment
The iron maiden worked really well too. Nice and slow bleeding till the sharp knives punctured the heart. The agony was exquisite. The ecstasy on the face of the executioner was sublime. All the while the church demanded more blood.

What the 7734 hath the Holy Office to do with this? Rather gratuitous Catholic-bashing, tss, that ill becomes us.

I find it extremely strange that those who are so squeamish about a fairly quick and relatively painless death by firing squad have no problem with inflicting psychological torture for 20+ years in confining, depriving, and isolating people who know that death might come at any moment.

"Life without possibility of parole" is crueler than anything I can envision, short of Bud Day's 5+ years in the Hanoi Hilton.

Link to comment

What happened to turn the other cheek?

That has to do with insults. Being slapped on the cheek was and still is a huge humiliation in the Middle East. The only thing more humiliating is being spat on in the face. Christ's point was instead of retaliation, bear insults with patience.

Turning the other cheek and an eye for an eye are different principles.

Link to comment

That has to do with insults. Being slapped on the cheek was and still is a huge humiliation in the Middle East. The only thing more humiliating is being spat on in the face. Christ's point was instead of retaliation, bear insults with patience.

Turning the other cheek and an eye for an eye are different principles.

I was going to say that "eye for an eye" appeared to be more government related, while "turn the other cheek" was on an individual level; everyday life.

Link to comment

Matthew 5:38-40 (New International Version)

An Eye for an Eye

38"You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.'[a] 39But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well.

Link to comment

The primary problem I have with the death penalty is that it takes so long to enact. By the time anyone is actually executed, it seems, they've been in prison for close to twenty years after their crime.

That's not justice to my mind.

Link to comment

Matthew 5:38-40 (New International Version)

An Eye for an Eye

38"You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.'[a] 39But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well.

So basically you are saying, if someone murders you once just turn over and let them murder you again :P ?

Link to comment
That has to do with insults. Being slapped on the cheek was and still is a huge humiliation in the Middle East. The only thing more humiliating is being spat on in the face. Christ's point was instead of retaliation, bear insults with patience.

Turning the other cheek and an eye for an eye are different principles.

Yup:

My object all sublime

I shall achieve in time

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...