Woman set to become 14th to die by execution since 1976

[Foxrac]

I think respectyoda successfully fixed my morality - I use blue font.

 

[Dreamer03]

Yoy are been disrespectful. Change that please. You saod to give what you want. Give respect and people migjt decide to give you respect. If everyone has to follow the "golden rules" you say. Doesn't it include you?

 

[respectyoda]

Justice is not about revenge or feuds. You need to study the legal process of the United States courts.

I am aware of the legal process of the United States courts, but my point I am attempting to illustrate is the underlying concept of the "eye for eye and tooth for tooth" in which it is inappropriate to take a person's life since that person took a life of someone else.

No, you don't need to be "nice" to murderers.

As far as the golden rule goes, it is being followed if they got a fair trial.

All actions carry consequences.

Since you quoted the book earlier, it states that we must show love to our enemies. Is killing someone regardless of what they have done a way to show them love?

Of course, all actions carry consequences, however, we as humans are limited in what consequences we can have people accept.

Seeking justice for victims is not expressing hatred.

If you give the perpetrators a fair trial and appeal process, then that's as good as it gets.

Victims may want to get justice, but justice has to be obtained the proper and moral way. Killing our enemy isn't the proper way to obtain justice because it violates the golden rule and even the concept of love in which I discussed above.

Yes, a convicted perpetrator may get a fair trial, but remember the justice system does not always judge things fairly and correctly.

And you haven't?

That's not true. God provides explicitly for self-defense.

PM me on this and provide your defense using scriptures. Thank you.

Those were specific events with specific consequences. God never stated that all people were supposed to avoid self-defense in all circumstances. That is a very perverted interpretation that allows criminals to act with impunity.

Once again, since you are mentioning God here, I'll just state that God commands us to not retaliate and remove ourselves from the situation as well as the fact He will protect His people.

Yes, there are corrupt individuals within governments but that doesn't mean God prefers anarchy. :roll:

There is a scripture that states we must be obedient to the government as long as they do not require us to follow laws that violate God's law.

Apparently you have a problem understanding the difference between the words kill and murder. They are not interchangeable, and you use them incorrectly.

In fact, kill and murder are used interchangeably. Let's examine two sentences. "He killed his wife." "He murdered his wife." They both mean the same! It is just like using two different words that basically mean the same.

Spit it out--what are you trying to say?

I am simply stating that man has dominion over animals in which they can kill and use animals for whatever resource they need. This though doesn't justify being cruel to them. Now, our Creator never gave us power over another human being in which we can take their life. Think about Cain and Abel.

If you find it wrong to kill an intruder who attempts to murder your family, then just stand by and watch. That's your prerogative. However, don't blame God; He's not preventing self-defense.

I wouldn't watch as I would escape for my dear life as God will give a way for His people to escape these situations. It is wrong to take a life no matter what the circumstances are. Taking someone's life for whatever reason is not justifiable because like I said before, we are to love all, even our enemies and killing goes against that principle.

Sure, as long as you can refrain from your misleading statements about killing, self-defense, and murder.

My statements are not misleading as they are logical true and sound.

I think respectyoda successfully fixed my morality - I use blue font.

Your sense of humor is terrible. Morality has nothing to do with colors and fonts.

 

[Reba]

Like I said earlier, it is not my motto. It is just a golden rule that we all should abide by.

If I was doing something immoral/unnatural and someone told me about it, I would be thankful and change my ways just like I would help people understand what is immoral/unnatural so they can change their ways in order to have a better life.

Yes, I'm sure that's the reason those convicted murderers slaughtered innocent people--they didn't understand what is immoral/unnatural so they could change their ways. :roll:

Sorry, it's you who don't understand. Some people do immoral/unnatural things because they enjoy evil.

 

[Foxrac]

Your sense of humor is terrible. Morality has nothing to do with colors and fonts.

You have no sense of humor.

 

[respectyoda]

Yes, I'm sure that's the reason those convicted murderers slaughtered innocent people--they didn't understand what is immoral/unnatural so they could change their ways. :roll:

Sorry, it's you who don't understand. Some people do immoral/unnatural things because they enjoy evil.

Some people do immoral/unnatural things because they enjoy evil, but because they were not taught on those things from their youth or have gotten themselves involved in things they shouldn't. Ignorance is not an excuse.

You have no sense of humor.

I do have a sense of humor, but it is not as dry as yours. Hahaha!

 

[Foxrac]

I do have a sense of humor, but it is not as dry as yours. Hahaha!

OMG, your sense of humor is really bad.

 

[Dreamer03]

Killl and murder are not interchangeable just like reba saod. And just cuz ylu say your argument is logical does not mean it is. And i think im screwed then...cuz for me there aint a god. ( i still respect those who do belive in one or many or whatever you belive)

 

[Frisky Feline]

 

[Lau2046]

Victims may want to get justice, but justice has to be obtained the proper and moral way.

There's nothing moral about murderers, and not much "justice" in the our legal system. More often than not, killers get time off for 'good behavior' and are out, inexplicably, in more than a few cases, out in as little as two years.

I always regret the choices a person makes that leads them to prison but I sympathize more with the victim who was often tortured and made to suffer a lingering and painful death for someone's sheer amusement. Dying quickly by needle is a comfort they didn't offer their victims. If there's anything inhumane in the process, it's how the victims died. I remember a respected coroner that spoke of his former school, whose motto was "We speak for the dead." Every time someone that kills gets sympathy from the public, the voices of the deceased are robbed again. While I believe in compassion for all, I still believe that those that have chosen not to obey the laws of society forfeit their rights to live among us. You prefer to preserve the life of someone that kills, I choose to remember the life that was lost.

Laura

 

[rockin'robin]

There's nothing moral about murderers, and not much "justice" in the our legal system. More often than not, killers get time off for 'good behavior' and are out, inexplicably, in more than a few cases, out in as little as two years.

I always regret the choices a person makes that leads them to prison but I sympathize more with the victim who was often tortured and made to suffer a lingering and painful death for someone's sheer amusement. Dying quickly by needle is a comfort they didn't offer their victims. If there's anything inhumane in the process, it's how the victims died. I remember a respected coroner that spoke of his former school, whose motto was "We speak for the dead." Every time someone that kills gets sympathy from the public, the voices of the deceased are robbed again. While I believe in compassion for all, I still believe that those that have chosen not to obey the laws of society forfeit their rights to live among us. You prefer to preserve the life of someone that kills, I choose to remember the life that was lost.

Laura

5-stars, Laura!....

 

[Reba]

I am aware of the legal process of the United States courts, but my point I am attempting to illustrate is the underlying concept of the "eye for eye and tooth for tooth" in which it is inappropriate to take a person's life since that person took a life of someone else.

American courts don't use the concept of an eye for an eye. Our courts' sentences are never retribution for the crimes that have been committed on the victims. They don't even come close. The punishments are always way, way less than what the criminals inflicted upon their victims.

Since you quoted the book earlier, it states that we must show love to our enemies. Is killing someone regardless of what they have done a way to show them love?

Of course, all actions carry consequences, however, we as humans are limited in what consequences we can have people accept.

Administering justice doesn't mean one isn't showing love. Truly showing love for a wrongdoer means showing them clearly their evil, the consequences of their evil, and their need to repent from their evil.

Who can forgive the murderer? The only person/s with that right are the victims. Only those who have received the injury can forgive the pain-giver. Neither you nor I can forgive the murderer of Robin's mother. We don't have that right. If Robin in her heart chooses to do that, it's up to her. No one else can claim that right.

Victims may want to get justice, but justice has to be obtained the proper and moral way. Killing our enemy isn't the proper way to obtain justice because it violates the golden rule and even the concept of love in which I discussed above.

Yes, a convicted perpetrator may get a fair trial, but remember the justice system does not always judge things fairly and correctly.

Without using our court system how would you propose victims get justice?

"Do unto others (murderers) as you would have others (murderers) do unto you."

We do. We turn them over to the courts for fair trials and punishments that are within legal guidelines. If we committed their heinous crimes, that would be the best thing we could want. Otherwise, if we did what they wanted, we'd be carrying out our own revenge with our bare hands, just as they did.

Once again, since you are mentioning God here, I'll just state that God commands us to not retaliate and remove ourselves from the situation as well as the fact He will protect His people.

Using the courts system is not retaliation. Carrying out personal revenge with our own hands is retaliation.

The rain falls on the just and the unjust.

Certainly you must realize that even God's people get raped, tortured and murdered? They deserve justice as much as anyone else.

There is a scripture that states we must be obedient to the government as long as they do not require us to follow laws that violate God's law.

I believe I already stated that. There is nothing in God's law that prohibits our criminal court system.

In fact, kill and murder are used interchangeably. Let's examine two sentences. "He killed his wife." "He murdered his wife." They both mean the same! It is just like using two different words that basically mean the same.

No, they don't.

"He killed his wife." How? He accidentally backed the car over her? That's not murder.

Murder has very precise definitions for the various legal degrees.

Even the Bible differentiates between manslaughter and murder.

I am simply stating that man has dominion over animals in which they can kill and use animals for whatever resource they need. This though doesn't justify being cruel to them. Now, our Creator never gave us power over another human being in which we can take their life. Think about Cain and Abel.

A court assigned death sentence is not using man for whatever resource they need. There is no comparison.

Yes, God did give authority for legal death sentences to man.

I wouldn't watch as I would escape for my dear life as God will give a way for His people to escape these situations. It is wrong to take a life no matter what the circumstances are. Taking someone's life for whatever reason is not justifiable because like I said before, we are to love all, even our enemies and killing goes against that principle.

It's very insulting of you to imply that if someone doesn't escape a murderer that he or she isn't one of God's people. It was even you who mentioned the early Christian martyrs. Were they not God's people?

It's also interesting that you say you would escape with your dear life (presuming that you could) yet you would leave behind your loved ones to suffer at the hands of a murderer. Nice.

So, it's wrong to kill one attacker but right to let that attacker murder your entire family?

 

[KikLove]

Those carnivores are designed to kill animals for food. They don't, however, kill of their own species. You don't see a lion killing another lion. You don't see a bear killing another bear. They kill their prey which the prey is NOT of their species. It ought to be the same way for humans as they can kill animals for food, clothes, oil, etc, but not their own fellow human being.

I know of a video on YouTube where a mother lion ate her cub because it was injured and unable to walk...should I go find it for proof?

 

[Jiro]

Not necessarily. Many jails/prisons have a library and many inmates are allowed to have a certain number of books in their cell.



Those carnivores are designed to kill animals for food. They don't, however, kill of their own species. You don't see a lion killing another lion. You don't see a bear killing another bear. They kill their prey which the prey is NOT of their species. It ought to be the same way for humans as they can kill animals for food, clothes, oil, etc, but not their own fellow human being.

um..... you are so mistaken....

many males do kill their own offsprings especially the bears. what do you think why most male animals do not stick around? and males do kill each other because they're terrestrial.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18muVT1GWqM]‫[/ame]

 

[KikLove]

On another note, if you like some of have had to read this case and the facts for your law classes...you would realize the details of the autopsy are much more accurate than those in this article. This man did not deserve to die like this. Maybe justice will have been served in the eyes of God...maybe not. We're not ones to know. However, I'm not going to spat religion into this thread either.

The woman committed capital murder in the state of Texas in the eyes of the law and that should be enough for you. The man's body was so badly messed up, you could not recognize him visually. In the eye of the law of Texas and the peers this lady set committed capital murder...

§ 19.03. CAPITAL MURDER. (a) A person commits an offense
if the person commits murder as defined under Section 19.02(b)(1)
and:
(1) the person murders a peace officer or fireman who
is acting in the lawful discharge of an official duty and who the
person knows is a peace officer or fireman;
(2) the person intentionally commits the murder in the
course of committing or attempting to commit kidnapping, burglary,
robbery, aggravated sexual assault, arson, obstruction or
retaliation, or terroristic threat under Section 22.07(a)(1), (3),
(4), (5), or (6);
(3) the person commits the murder for remuneration or
the promise of remuneration or employs another to commit the murder
for remuneration or the promise of remuneration;
(4) the person commits the murder while escaping or
attempting to escape from a penal institution;
(5) the person, while incarcerated in a penal
institution, murders another:
(A) who is employed in the operation of the penal
institution; or
(B) with the intent to establish, maintain, or
participate in a combination or in the profits of a combination;
(6) the person:
(A) while incarcerated for an offense under this
section or Section 19.02, murders another; or
(B) while serving a sentence of life imprisonment
or a term of 99 years for an offense under Section 20.04, 22.021, or
29.03, murders another;
(7) the person murders more than one person:
(A) during the same criminal transaction; or
(B) during different criminal transactions but
the murders are committed pursuant to the same scheme or course of
conduct;
(8) the person murders an individual under six years
of age; or
(9) the person murders another person in retaliation
for or on account of the service or status of the other person as a
judge or justice of the supreme court, the court of criminal
appeals, a court of appeals, a district court, a criminal district
court, a constitutional county court, a statutory county court, a
justice court, or a municipal court.
(b) An offense under this section is a capital felony.
(c) If the jury or, when authorized by law, the judge does
not find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of
an offense under this section, he may be convicted of murder or of
any other lesser included offense.

And if you need 19.02 to help give a clear definition murder in Texas:

§ 19.02. MURDER. (a) In this section:
(1) "Adequate cause" means cause that would commonly
produce a degree of anger, rage, resentment, or terror in a person
of ordinary temper, sufficient to render the mind incapable of cool
reflection.
(2) "Sudden passion" means passion directly caused by
and arising out of provocation by the individual killed or another
acting with the person killed which passion arises at the time of
the offense and is not solely the result of former provocation.
(b) A person commits an offense if he:
(1) intentionally or knowingly causes the death of an
individual;
(2) intends to cause serious bodily injury and commits
an act clearly dangerous to human life that causes the death of an
individual; or
(3) commits or attempts to commit a felony, other than
manslaughter, and in the course of and in furtherance of the
commission or attempt, or in immediate flight from the commission
or attempt, he commits or attempts to commit an act clearly
dangerous to human life that causes the death of an individual.
(c) Except as provided by Subsection (d), an offense under
this section is a felony of the first degree.
(d) At the punishment stage of a trial, the defendant may
raise the issue as to whether he caused the death under the
immediate influence of sudden passion arising from an adequate
cause. If the defendant proves the issue in the affirmative by a
preponderance of the evidence, the offense is a felony of the second
degree.

 

[respectyoda]

There's nothing moral about murderers, and not much "justice" in the our legal system. More often than not, killers get time off for 'good behavior' and are out, inexplicably, in more than a few cases, out in as little as two years.

I always regret the choices a person makes that leads them to prison but I sympathize more with the victim who was often tortured and made to suffer a lingering and painful death for someone's sheer amusement. Dying quickly by needle is a comfort they didn't offer their victims. If there's anything inhumane in the process, it's how the victims died. I remember a respected coroner that spoke of his former school, whose motto was "We speak for the dead." Every time someone that kills gets sympathy from the public, the voices of the deceased are robbed again. While I believe in compassion for all, I still believe that those that have chosen not to obey the laws of society forfeit their rights to live among us. You prefer to preserve the life of someone that kills, I choose to remember the life that was lost.

Laura

This is why I earlier said that the justice system does not hand out consequences that are always fit for the crime. I am not stating that the killers deserve sympathy, but they deserve to be treated like a human being. Of course, if a person breaks the law and is deemed dangerous to society, then he/she should be put in prison in order to be separated from the general population. However, once again, he/she is still a human being. It is not about just preserving the life of a cold blooded killer, but treating all human beings the same in spite of what they have done whether good or evil.

I know of a video on YouTube where a mother lion ate her cub because it was injured and unable to walk...should I go find it for proof?

Sure. Knock yourself out.

On another note, if you like some of have had to read this case and the facts for your law classes...you would realize the details of the autopsy are much more accurate than those in this article. This man did not deserve to die like this. Maybe justice will have been served in the eyes of God...maybe not. We're not ones to know. However, I'm not going to spat religion into this thread either.

The woman committed capital murder in the state of Texas in the eyes of the law and that should be enough for you. The man's body was so badly messed up, you could not recognize him visually. In the eye of the law of Texas and the peers this lady set committed capital murder...



And if you need 19.02 to help give a clear definition murder in Texas:

It is comical to see people, especially, the government try to define murder with pages and pages of definitions when God just gave one line - Thou shalt not murder. Murder just requires one definition - the killing of a human being. Simple as that. This is where man has tried to make definitions for certain terms in order to justify particular instances of killing/murder.

 

[Dreamer03]

So if i follow thia logic...i could go kill someone right now and it will be fine. You all got to forgive me and move on and please treat me nicely. Cuz we himans got to treat each other like we want to be treated. (So if you go kill someone, and you got to treat people like you wannna be treated....) (and no i wont go killing pwople)

 

[Reba]

It is comical to see people, especially, the government try to define murder with pages and pages of definitions when God just gave one line - Thou shalt not murder. Murder just requires one definition - the killing of a human being. Simple as that. This is where man has tried to make definitions for certain terms in order to justify particular instances of killing/murder.

Murder has very specific meaning; it is not killing in general.

Obviously the killing of enemy soldiers in warfare by God's chosen people under His command was not murder. God wouldn't have commanded His people to do something that was contrary to His law.

God wouldn't have described the conditions of manslaughter if all killing was murder.

God wouldn't have prescribed the death sentence for certain offenses if all killing was murder.

 

[KikLove]

It is comical to see people, especially, the government try to define murder with pages and pages of definitions when God just gave one line - Thou shalt not murder. Murder just requires one definition - the killing of a human being. Simple as that. This is where man has tried to make definitions for certain terms in order to justify particular instances of killing/murder.

Don't start posting religious stuff here. Going on and on isn't going to justify nor change my opinion, as a Christian, about the death penalty.

Justify? Justify is to help determine where in AREAS where the punishment should be given on Earth.

Now if you want to continue as a religious debate, we can PM each other.

 

[respectyoda]

Murder has very specific meaning; it is not killing in general.

Obviously the killing of enemy soldiers in warfare by God's chosen people under His command was not murder. God wouldn't have commanded His people to do something that was contrary to His law.

God wouldn't have described the conditions of manslaughter if all killing was murder.

God wouldn't have prescribed the death sentence for certain offenses if all killing was murder.

The only time people could kill was if God ordered them to. The reason why God made the commandment was because man cannot kill of his own accord! This is where man has erred by enacting the death penalty! More than often not, man has executed people who were actually innocent. Also, if you read the New Testament, you will never find a single verse where God or Christ told people to go and kill!

Don't start posting religious stuff here. Going on and on isn't going to justify nor change my opinion, as a Christian, about the death penalty.

Justify? Justify is to help determine where in AREAS where the punishment should be given on Earth.

Now if you want to continue as a religious debate, we can PM each other.

Justifying can be done rightly or wrongly. Man has justified things incorrectly because the things man have justified goes against nature. I stated in the thread earlier that I wasn't going to reference the Bible, but Reba brought it in. I also stated that if anyone wants to discuss this as it pertains to religion then PM me so hence, you are more than welcome to PM me about this!