Death Penalty for Murders

Fahad1

The goal is to protect the community from the harm caused by an individual and dissuade the criminals.

You are saying Death Penalty is a deterent to criminals? That may or may be not the case but I am talking about the principle of life being sacred and that no HUMAN should take another human's life...

peace Lotetree.
actually it is God who gives and takes life . we are only a tool .

The Koran 6151 Say Come, I will recite unto you that which your
Lord hath made a sacred duty for you that ye
ascribe no thing as partner unto Him and that ye
do good to parents, and that ye slay not your
children because of penury--We provide for you
and for them--and that ye draw not nigh to lewd
things whether open or concealed. And that ye
slay not the life which Allah hath made sacred,
save in the course of justice. This He hath
commanded you, in order that ye may discern.

marie

We cannot generalize or apply the same punishment because it depends on each case.

Yes. True. But you accept it as a principle. Either you hold Life is sacred or you dont.If you don't accept life as sacred then Death Penalty is acceptable.

We all agree the life is very sacred and this is why it should be protected.
I understand your point but you defend the the murderer and you forgot the victim..
Let us consider one case, when one kills intentionally and unfairly, the murderer doesn't consider the life of the victim sacred, can he consider his life sacred?.

To keep the innocent safe seems a very important reason to withdraw death penalty .

When it remains the slightest doubt and a lack of irrefutable proof, it is evident that the death penalty is inconceivable and prohibited.

It is upon the justice to do her Job correctly because the defendent is innocent if the justice cannot provide the irrefutable proof if his guilt.

unknownuser

We all agree the life is very sacred and this is why it should be protected.
I understand your point but you defend the the murderer and you forgot the victim..

I am not defending the murderer. I am defending the principle that life is sacred.

Let us consider one case, when one kills intentionally and unfairly, the murderer doesn't consider the life of the victim sacred, can he consider his life sacred?.

Some individuals may not consider their life as sacred, suicidal individulas for instance. But as a society we either uphold the principle that life is sacred or we don't.

To keep the innocent safe seems a very important reason to withdraw death penalty .

It is upon the justice to do her Job correctly because the defendent is innocent if the justice cannot provide the irrefutable proof if his guilt.

Yes maire, sometimes irrefutable proof of guild is overturned by later evidences and this has happened in countless cases in the UK alone. Death Penalty would have taken those innocent lives...

Regards,

unknownuser

peace

I am not defending the murderer. I am defending the principle that life is sacred.

You talk to much thats what you do, and you twisted my words out of proportion.
You ARE defending the killer, by defending that all life is sacred. But God allready said that all life is sacred EXCEPT in the cause of justice. The cause of justice, what do you think that might be?

Regards
Noah

Layth

Peace,

Just to see if I undertsand the point of not killing a murderer...Some would say that having a person rot in jail for their entire lives is more 'merciful' than killing the murderer?

If I had murdered someone and I was given the option to be executed immeditaly or rot in jail for the rest of my life, I would without hesitation take the first option (it is more merciful and more humane).

Also, when a person is killed for commiting murder, they are in-fact benefitting by paying the price of their crime on this Earth rather than having to pay for it with God in the Hearafter.

Dove

Also, when a person is killed for commiting murder, they are in-fact benefitting by paying the price of their crime on this Earth rather than having to pay for it with God in the Hearafter.

Won't they get punished in hell too?

Elena

Peace Layth, all,

Layth says

Just to see if I undertsand the point of not killing a murderer...

it is not to kill anybody, that's all.
Even killing an ant is not right. Ask Jains.

David

Peace Elena, LoteTree, all,

Elena

So any killing is wrong to you?

If you have a bacterial infection, would you take antibiotics?
What about if you had mold in your bathtub, would you remove it, or does it deserve to live?
If your home had a termite infestation, would you allow them to eat through the wood in your home?

What about those who are being oppressed? Do they have the right to bear arms and kill their oppressors to free themselves?

2216-217
Fighting is enjoined on you, and it is an object of dislike to you; and it may be that you dislike a thing while it is good for you, and it may be that you love a thing while it is evil for you, and Allah knows, while you do not know.
They ask you concerning the sacred month about fighting in it. Say Fighting in it is a grave matter, and hindering (men) from Allah's way and denying Him, and (hindering men from) the Sacred Mosque and turning its people out of it, are still graver with Allah, and persecution is graver than slaughter; and they will not cease fighting with you until they turn you back from your religion, if they can; and whoever of you turns back from his religion, then he dies while an unbeliever-- these it is whose works shall go for nothing in this world and the hereafter, and they are the inmates of the fire; therein they shall abide.

Persecution and oppression is indeed worse than slaughter, for oppression is a form of violence which attacks a person?s soul. Generations grow up without hope.

LoteTree

I find it interesting that someone who opposes seeing things as ?black and white? would hold the position that ?all life is sacred? and that any killing is wrong?no exceptions.

peace

Elena

Peace Elena, LoteTree, all,

Elena

So any killing is wrong to you?

If you have a bacterial infection, ....

The classical questions, I see.
Self-defense in the only justified case. But don't confuse this with the other cases are being discussed here.

Andya_Primanda

Peace sis Marie and everyone,

We cannot generalize or apply the same punishment because it depends on each case.

Why don't we try to be 'judges' for the cases I put earlier, and some other cases that has been proposed here, as examples? They are

A person who puts down a terminally ill/injured person (euthanasia/mercy killing)
A person who kills in self defense
A person who bombed a crowded place, killing many people
A person whose orders result in a lot of killing

5a. A serial killer (without mental problems--kills intentionally)

5b. A serial killer (with mental problems--kills unintentionally)

A person killing someone who oppresses him/her

For argument's sake let's suppose all of these persons have been found guilt beyond reasonable doubt (thereby eliminating the possibility of innocence excuse).

If you are a judge, whom among those people will receive a death penalty?

David

Peace Elena,

The classical questions, I see.
Self-defense in the only justified case. But don't confuse this with the other cases are being discussed here.

Well, you are the one that said ?Even killing an ant is not right?. I guess it?s not right only so long as they are not eating your home?

And why is self-defense a justified case? Is your life ?more sacred? or worth more than the other person?

marie

We all agree the life is very sacred and this is why it should be protected.
I understand your point but you defend the the murderer and you forgot the victim..

I am not defending the murderer. I am defending the principle that life is sacred.

Except in the cause of justice.

To keep the innocent safe seems a very important reason to withdraw death penalty .

It is upon the justice to do her Job correctly because the defendent is innocent if the justice cannot provide the irrefutable proof if his guilt.

Yes marie, sometimes irrefutable proof of guild is overturned by later evidences and this has happened in countless cases in the UK alone. Death Penalty would have taken those innocent lives...

I do not believe in the fatality, and especially in justice. When the defendent always proclaims his innocence and the community also believe that he is innocent, the justice has to consider these opinions. The justice is a duty of the individual and the community.

The justice can liberate a murderer by mistake or lack of proof. As I stated above, when the defendent proclaims his innocence, the justice has not the right to do the deaf ear and condemn him.

The justice errors are the result of incomplete and subjective investigations (corruption, racism)...
There is a lot of works to improve the justice system.

Fahad1

Also, when a person is killed for commiting murder, they are in-fact benefitting by paying the price of their crime on this Earth rather than having to pay for it with God in the Hearafter.

Won't they get punished in hell too?

yes. they will be punished in hell too.

unknownuser

Hello Noah,

You talk to much thats what you do, and you twisted my words out of proportion.

You seems to talk nonsense like the way you did on the "Why muslim shouldn't drink thread" because you think alcohol is flammable.

But this is what you wrote

"If some brutal simpleton kills and keeps on killing, i would put him out of
his misery instantly."

and this is what I wrote

"Simpleton? If they are simpleton are they responsible for their
actions? And you would get rid of mentally deficient individuals?
sounds fascist to me, like Nazies..."

And I ask you again - are mentally deficient individuals responsible for their actions? All the European nations do not consider it so nor do the many of the Asian countries and even some states in America.

And have you read history of fascism? and the Nazies, and what they did to the mentally retarded and physically deformed individuals? If you allow mentally deficient individulas to be killed this way then anything possible.

You ARE defending the killer, by defending that all life is sacred.

Are not human life sacred to you? Are we equal before God or some individuals more equal than others?

But God allready said that all life is sacred EXCEPT in the cause of justice.
The cause of justice, what do you think that might be?

But I told you. Human justice is fallible and because of this fallibility
innocent lives will be lost because of the Death Penalty.

Regards,

unknownuser

Hello David,

So any killing is wrong to you?

The question was is human life SACRED. The answer it seems to be a resounding YES. Then SOCIETY as whole should either uphold this principle or it should not.

If you have a bacterial infection, would you take antibiotics?
What about if you had mold in your bathtub, would you remove it, or does it deserve to live?

David, David we have been discussing free willed human life here as opposed to bacterial cells that happened to infect your bath-tub or your armpit! If you can show that bacteria are conscious free willed spiritual organisms and thinks about transcendent God and then hey yes you can say use of antibiotics on them is wrong! -)

I find it interesting that someone who opposes seeing things as ?black and white? would hold the position that ?all life is sacred? and that any killing is wrong?no exceptions.

Perhaps David you should contemplate and reflect on the nature of free willed human LIFE, perhaps you could see the sanctity of human existence...

Regards,

unknownuser

Just to see if I undertsand the point of not killing a murderer...Some would say that having a person rot in jail for their entire lives is more 'merciful' than killing the murderer?

No. Some people are saying that society either upholds life as sacred or it does not. Some people are saying that we should not justify one murder with another murder because that will be lowering ourselves to the level of the murderer. Some people are saying that human justice is fallible and therefore as result of this innocent lives will be lost because of the Death Penalty.

If I had murdered someone and I was given the option to be executed immeditaly or rot in jail for the rest of my life, I would without hesitation take the first option (it is more merciful and more humane).

If God gave you life - why should another human being take it?

You find Prison unmerciful?
That is why it is called a punishment and not a holiday! In my view living with consquences of your actions is True Punishment. Choosing execution is a cowards way out!

Regards,

unknownuser

Peace sis Marie and everyone,

We cannot generalize or apply the same punishment because it depends on each case.

Why don't we try to be 'judges' for the cases I put earlier, and some other cases that has been proposed here, as examples? They are

A person who puts down a terminally ill/injured person (euthanasia/mercy killing)
A person who kills in self defense
A person who bombed a crowded place, killing many people
A person whose orders result in a lot of killing

5a. A serial killer (without mental problems--kills intentionally)

5b. A serial killer (with mental problems--kills unintentionally)

A person killing someone who oppresses him/her

For argument's sake let's suppose all of these persons have been found guilt beyond reasonable doubt (thereby eliminating the possibility of innocence excuse).

If you are a judge, whom among those people will receive a death penalty?

None. If these individuals are danger to themselves and other individuals and to the society they live in then they should remain in prison indefinatley...

Regards,

unknownuser

peace lote tree

You seems to talk nonsense like the way you did on the "Why muslim shouldn't drink thread" because you think alcohol is flammable.

So by using your way of turning my words, alcohol is not flammable is that what youre saying? Besides that, i didnt claim that people shoudnt drink because its flammable, i said that I wouldnt do it. The title of the thread was obviously (or rather less obviously apparently) ironic if you looked at the videolink posted.

And I ask you again - are mentally deficient individuals responsible for their actions?

No they are not

2 entries found for simpleton.
sim?ple?ton Audio pronunciation of "simpleton" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (smpl-tn)
n.

A person who is felt to be deficient in judgment, good sense, or intelligence; a fool.

and that is not by default the same as some one who is

re?tard2 Audio pronunciation of "retards" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (rt?rd)
n. Offensive Slang

Used as a disparaging term for a mentally retarded person.
A person considered to be foolish or socially inept.

I used the word simpleton to describe a fool, defying the law of God. By slaying unjustly.

And have you read history of fascism? and the Nazies, and what they did to the mentally retarded and physically deformed individuals?

Yes i have, but i fail to see what it has to do with

1734 And do not kill, for God has made this forbidden, except in the course of justice. And whoever is killed unjustly, then We have given his heir authority, so let him not transgress in the taking of a life, for He will be given victory.

If you allow mentally deficient individulas to be killed this way then anything possible.

I dont, i was using a term that you bend around the auger to make a standpoint out of.

Are not human life sacred to you? Are we equal before God or some individuals more equal than others?

1734 And do not kill, for God has made this forbidden, except in the course of justice... there is no way around this one, along with

535 It is because of this that We have decreed for the Children of Israel "Anyone who kills a person who has not committed murder, or who has not committed corruption in the land; then it is as if he has killed all the people! And whoever spares a life, then it is as if he has given life to all the people." Our messengers had come to them with clarification, but many of them are, after this, still corrupting on the Earth.

A person who has not comitted murder, i dont see God withdrawing this anywhere. Justice is selfdefence, and in the case of murder, but its up to the kin of the murdered to decide. If forgiveness (prefered) is chosen, the man is forgiven, no ifs or buts, and will have his with God. He still have his life to live and a chance to make up for what happened, if he does it again, a new set of kin will his story given perhaps not be so kind.

But I told you. Human justice is fallible and because of this fallibility
innocent lives will be lost because of the Death Penalty.

If applied in the system as it is i agree. But that is hardly the point. this system needs to change not Gods. Gods system is perfect, and yet unaplied. Besides what does he have to loose if he is killed unjustly. A heavenly reward, OMG!! we better not go there. God is just, and when we make err that is no exception.

Im sorry to come of as rude, but i took offence to your focus on a word, rather than a text. And from where im standing it looks as if your tying knots on yourself to get around what the Quran says about justified killing. But that hardly makes me a nazi, or ??

Regards
Noah

unknownuser

peace

to make sure i get the message through. Killing the killer is not applied by default, but a right to seek justice the next of kin has. Though forgiveness is looked higher upon.

Regards
Noah

Andya_Primanda

If you are a judge, whom among those people will receive a death penalty?

None. If these individuals are danger to themselves and other individuals and to the society they live in then they should remain in prison indefinatley...

Regards,

Okay, that's one predictable answer from you. Good.

How about the others, anyone willing to offer their judgement? Noah? Saladin? Sis Marie? anyone?

The cases are

A person who puts down a terminally ill/injured person (euthanasia/mercy killing)
A person who kills in self defense
A person who bombed a crowded place, killing many people
A person whose orders result in a lot of killing (ie. a leader who orders an invasion to another country/people)

5a. A serial killer (without mental problems--kills intentionally)

5b. A serial killer (with mental problems--kills unintentionally)

A person killing someone who oppresses him/her

If you are a judge, whom among those people will receive a death penalty?