Boston. Bomber Sentenced to Death

[lilpixieofterror]

True...celebrating one's death under those circumstances would be poor form, unless he repents? There have been some who, having converted, still accepted their deaths. I have no problem with that...but I wouldn't celebrate; I say it's a matter of God's will be done.

I do hope to see repentance too, but it is important to remember that there is nothing wrong with justice being served (when you do a violent act; the reality is you might end up an victim of violence yourself). We need to be careful though not to see this as a moment of vengeance.

[Paprika]

True...celebrating one's death under those circumstances would be poor form, unless he repents?

There's nothing with rejoicing that justice is done (eg. Rev 18:20).

But back to the topic: coming from a society where death penalty for murder is the norm, opposition to the death penalty still remains something curious and alien. After all,

Show no pity. You must purge from Israel the guilt of shedding innocent blood, so that it may go well with you.

Pity should not stand in the way of necessary justice.

[DesertBerean]

The victims asking for the life imprisonment were concerned they would have to relive the trauma through all the appeals. I do sympathize wit this. Personally I don't mind one or two appeals - after all, we are talking about death - but that's not what happens in most of our death penalty verdicts. And let's not talk about the expenses borne by the taxpayers during all those appeals. Is this true justice?

[Paprika]

Is this true justice?

No, it's not true justice when the legal process is so needlessly complicated, but that's the fault of those who instituted it and those that don't want to do anything about it.

But that's life: very often there is no choice that will magically make the situation good; there is only the choice between lesser and greater evil.

Frankly, appeals are rather ridiculous given the admission that he did the act, but your law is yours.

[DesertBerean]

He did plead guilty. That may limit his options.

[Paprika]

He did plead guilty. That may limit his options.

I'm going to go with 'life for life OT-style stoning will be much more efficient'.

[DesertBerean]

Which they did AFTER witness testimony before judges, per Moses, in a society very different from ours. In NT times the concept of the death penalty was still around, but as I recall someone here on TWeb pointing out, Paul addressed former homesexuals and murderers in Galatians...groups who by law should have been tried and, if found guilty, put to death. Of course, this was in Roman times, where the capital punishment was severely controlled.

Today, in our society, the death penalty is hotly debated, using the Bible, by both sides. In this instance, the accused pled guilty, so the only decision was what penalty he should get. Even his victims are divided on this.

[Paprika]

Which they did AFTER witness testimony before judges, per Moses, in a society very different from ours. In NT times the concept of the death penalty was still around, but as I recall someone here on TWeb pointing out, Paul addressed former homesexuals and murderers in Galatians...groups who by law should have been tried and, if found guilty, put to death.

Jewish law had no force in Galatia, just as how Sharia law has no force in Alaska.

[DesertBerean]

Jewish law had no force in Galatia, just as how Sharia law has no force in Alaska.

Hmm, yes...I stand corrected.