Death Penalty for Murders
-
First of all Noah, I don't take Quran as the whole truth or absolute truth. In fact I don't take any scripture to be the whole truth or absolute truth.
salam Lotetree.
which part of the koran do u consider to be true("A TRUTH") ?
i have asked u this question before too , but u didnt reply .As I have said before - All religions assert that God is beyond Reason and Language. So how do you describe with words something that is beyond language and reason? How do you describe the truth of colour to someone who is born blind? or truth of music to someone who is born deaf? You can't, not with words. They have to experience this truth for themselves to "know" that it exists. Some truths, have to be experienced and can't be described with words. The Truth of Divinity is one of them. But this has not stopped human beings in trying to describe this ineffable experience with words. Scriptures therefore, are the attempts to describe this ineffable experience of God in human language. Therefore scripture is an "interpretation" of a reality that is beyond words and reason. And there is no "this bit is true" and "this bit is false", all of it is an "interpretation" in human language. And the language of the scripture is that of the 6th Arabia, the Morality of the scripture is the morality of the 6th century Arabia. That is why you get "spoils of war" being distributed amongst the victors. That is why the victims of war becomes your "Right Hand" possesion that can be made into slaves and concubines. This kind of Morality is unacceptable in this century.
You may disagree with this and that is ok, I don't mind because scripture is not important to me. Only thing that matters is understanding God. And I am applying my God-given reason, intutions and imaginations in this endevour.
But if you want to understand the nature of "A TRUTH" then I urge you to study and practice meditation then you might grasp something of the wordless reality that is God...
Regards,
-
Peace LoteTree,
I would like to remind you that at this very moment in time, you can find people living in "prehistoric age", "stone age"..."medieval age".... until "modern age or information age".
So basically, if you consider humanity as a group, you'll need a set of laws that can deal with all this spectrum independantely of the developpement factor, since humans are the same at any and every level.
And even in the same society, you can find this same spectrum in its mosaic of people, from less to more developped.
--
-
Perhaps Lotetree, you should reflect on God's words, perhaps you would see that it is a mercy and a guidance.
I have David. That is why Scripture is A GUIDE to me. God is not the SCRIPTURE. Scripture is a GUIDE to God. But you can argue with me that this is a better guide...
A couple questions for you
Would you kill in self-defense?
Do you believe in an afterlife?The question was should we kill the murderer. I said no and I have given my reasons for it. This about punishment. Death Penalty being the final punishement. But the broader implication to this question is should society practice Death Penalty. I said No again and I have given my reasons for it.
Now you are asking me should I kill in self-defense? There is a biological urge for self-preservation. This is different from wanting to kill the murderer as a pracitice by society that you live in.
Do I believe in an after-life? I don't accept literal description of after-life in the scripture. I would like to see descriptions of after life in a symbolic and metaphoric sense. Dancing around rivers of Wine and Honey in paradise as recounted in the scripture doesn't appeal to me...
Regards,
-
Peace LoteTree,
That is why Scripture is A GUIDE to me
I don't think it is "a guide" to you, at least not all of it. Based on your position, I think it would be more accurate for you to state "some of Scriputre is a guide to me".
When I asked
So any killing is wrong to you.
You stated
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.
So I asked
Would you kill in self-defense?
and now you state
The question was should we kill the murderer. I said no and I have given my reasons for it. This about punishment. Death Penalty being the final punishement. But the broader implication to this question is should society practice Death Penalty. I said No again and I have given my reasons for it.
Your premise is that the death penalty should not be applied because all human life is sacred. Thus my question about self-defense is perfectly valid. In fact, any scenario I bring forth which involves the killing of another person is valid given your premise.
Now you are asking me should I kill in self-defense? There is a biological urge for self-preservation. This is different from wanting to kill the murderer as a pracitice by society that you live in.
Biological urge? I hope you are not saying that we base morality on biological urges? As I?m sure you are aware, many mystical writings try hard to separate the soul from the body through asceticism.
So my question still stands, ?Would you kill in self-defense??
(I'm sure you can see where this is leading)peace
-
Biological urge? I hope you are not saying that we base morality on biological urges? As I?m sure you are aware, many mystical writings try hard to separate the soul from the body through asceticism.
Come on David, there is biological instinct, there is a biological imperative for self-preservation when attacked. You can't do nothing about it. It is an innate reaction. It is an impulse as opposed to sitting down and saying murderer should be murdered for his murder. And yes life is sacred and therefore as a society it either uphold this principle or it does not. Killing in self-defense is tragic because you did not intend to kill...
Regards,
-
Hello Saladin,
God is beyond reason , so why are u trying in vain to use your REASON to understand God ?
Ah Saladin. Now you come to the point. Reason is very important. REASON takes you to the limits of human undertanding and no more. But God has given us the gift of INTUITION and IMAGINATION. Intuition and imaginations allows us to see beyond REASON and LOGIC and grasp some understanding of the God who is beyond language and reason. This is the insight that all the great seers, sages, prophets and mystics have arrived at independently...
and where does the koran say that God is beyond language ?
Our REASON is tied to our language. Read Heidegger, Saladin.
the best way to teach humans is by language
That is true. But to understand God reason is not enough because God is beyond reason. Reason will take you so far but at the final encounter with the Divine, REASON is "trascended".
so u agree that Koran was revealed to Muhammad , but Muhammad might have misinterpreted it ?
I believe that Muhammad did encounter the Divine but he had no choice but interpret his encounter with the limited capabilities of language of his day. But Language does not justice to the reality he was trying to convey. I would not say misinterpretation but rather language is inadequate to describe the wordless reality that is God...
Regards,
-
Hi,
I have skimmed through the posts under this thread and there is one serious point missing. Without this we can not judge.
God is very impersonal of nature, and the system God has given us to live by, is based on the best possible, balanced, way for all creatures.
Criminal acts are not punished as a revenge towards the perpetrator, it?s first and foremost function, is to rectify a situation caused by an act that has damaged anyone and/or anything.In the case of theft, the thief is responsible towards the sufferer to replace what he/she has stolen, and it may be that the community has to be protected against the perpetrator.
In case somebody, unlawfully, takes a life of a human being, there are a number of circumstances to be taken into consideration in order to minimize the problem this has created for individuals, a community or part of a community.
First of all, the murderer has a debt with God, which he can never settle. He/she has taken away something sacred. The murdered person can not be brought back to life; therefore total rectification is out of the question. It does not matter what the perpetrator does for the rest of his/her life, he/she can not fully compensate for taking a human life.
Next, who was at loss due to the act and how to make good this loss?
If the murdered person was a breadwinner that one or more individuals relied on, either personally, as a group, or as a part of a community, the economic loss may be demanded compensated, as per a common evaluation.
The emotional loss, what to do? In its extreme there may be a demand of killing the murderer. And it may also be justified.
But there is one question that is taken far too lightly by courts where death penalty is exercised, who is going to execute the sentence?
The only person who may rightfully do this is the person having the right to demand the penalty.
To have a professional executioner is not according to God. You can not lawfully take a human life by proxy.The same goes for medical personnel in the case of so called mercy-killing, they are not allowed to do that, only person(s) directly affected. They have to bear the consequences of their decision and their action.
Here is another question ?Who has the right to decide?? Husband/wife, mother, father, siblings, children etc.There are ?thousand and one? questions to be answered in each individual case, and therefore impossible to set up absolute rules as per the questions asked in this thread.
There may also be people behind the person performing the physical act of killing a human being, who are to be counted in as responsible for the act.
We have seen many cases of humans killing humans in many areas of the World, where the ones executing the murders are brainwashed by others into believing they are doing what is right. The brain ?guiding the weapon? may be far away from the actual scene of crime. How to judge in such a case? Who is the actual killer?First and foremost, we should strive to bring a situation back towards as much balance as possible. This is what God?s system is telling us, not to seek revenge but to make the existence for everything, and every one, best possible.
Or, in other words, keep the best possible balance.Regds
Ali Omar
-
If the whole system was developed to serve and save souls than I dont see the logic behind any rule to kill another soul. One killing cant justify another killing because they both are taking souls which no humans can create.
peace
-
Hi shamsul-arefin,
I believe you are absolutely right; killing of one human can not justify killing of another human.
Therefore God advise us to be careful in the matter of taking a life, even in the event that someone, ?the heir?, is given the right, there are limits to observe.
It is also told that one who save a life, it is as though he saved the whole of humanity.
As I understand, it is under very special circumstances only, that it may not be punishable to take another life.Regds
Ali Omar
-
Hi shamsul-arefin,
I believe you are absolutely right; killing of one human can not justify killing of another human.
Therefore God advise us to be careful in the matter of taking a life, even in the event that someone, ?the heir?, is given the right, there are limits to observe.
It is also told that one who save a life, it is as though he saved the whole of humanity.
As I understand, it is under very special circumstances only, that it may not be punishable to take another life.Regds
Ali Omar
dear bro...
thanks for ur reply......
in my opinion......if anyone gets killed during self diffence than it is justifiable. But killing a soul with the most quite, stable(the court) mind is something I cant accept.
-
Peace,
though you all probably know, and if anyone is interested, amnesty international offers some ways to help against death penalty, not only by donating funds but also by doing voluntary works, online voluntary works too, writing letters, adding signatures in some campaigns. There are a lot of links, http//web.amnesty.org/pages/deathpenalty-index-eng http//web.amnesty.org/pages/deathpenalty-actnow-eng are two of them. The campaigns to avoid executing men and women condemned to be stoned by the sariah in some countries are known, but there are a lot of other cases in different countries.
-
Peace Ali Omar,
It does not matter what the perpetrator does for the rest of his/her life, he/she can not fully compensate for taking a human life.
Exact.
The only person who may rightfully do this is the person having the right to demand the penalty.
To have a professional executioner is not according to God. You can not lawfully take a human life by proxy.Good point.
It will dissuade the victim's family.
-
Peace,
though you all probably know, and if anyone is interested, amnesty international offers some ways to help against death penalty, not only by donating funds but also by doing voluntary works, online voluntary works too, writing letters, adding signatures in some campaigns. There are a lot of links, http//web.amnesty.org/pages/deathpenalty-index-eng http//web.amnesty.org/pages/deathpenalty-actnow-eng are two of them. The campaigns to avoid executing men and women condemned to be stoned by the sariah in some countries are known, but there are a lot of other cases in different countries.
Peace Elena,
I don't know if us Free-minds people have a united view on this. LoteTree and some others might agree for getting rid of the death penalty, while Saladin and others (myself included) is pro death penalty.
-
I don't know if us Free-minds people have a united view on this. LoteTree and some others might agree for getting rid of the death penalty, while Saladin and others (myself included) is pro death penalty.
Interesting Andya. I thought all scientist are anti-death penalty? And what is your reason behind your pro-death penalty stance?
Regards,
-
Interesting Andya. I thought all scientist are anti-death penalty? And what is your reason behind your pro-death penalty stance?
Regards,
Well, don't make a stereotype out of scientists. Scientists are not a homogenous crowd. And they kill little animals all the time.
My pro-death stance comes from the qisas verses in the Qur'an.
-
Peace,
Andya Primanda wroteMy pro-death stance comes from the qisas verses in the Qur'an.
I was in the brink of asking that recently, if the reason of defending the death penalty was that it appears in the quran.
I see the order of events like follows (correct me if I am wrong, and I hope I am)1 you (not only Andya, whoever) are muslim because of having being born in a muslim family or through study or by conversion
2 you accept everything appears in the version and/or translation you regard as authentic of the quran (by 'version' I am referring to the versions dicussed in "Which is the Real Quran" thread)
3 when something that appears in it is hard to believe or accept, you believe it directly anyway, or you look for all ways to justify the possible reasons behind it. -
Hi Elena,
Just a comment
- Everybody is borne a Muslim we have no choice.
- You don?t accept every word the way it is written; you accept the message behind the words in light of how the Qur?an should be understood.
- When something appears that is hard to believe or accept, you have not understood it.
Regds
Ali Omar
-
I was in the brink of asking that recently, if the reason of defending the death penalty was that it appears in the quran.
I see the order of events like follows (correct me if I am wrong, and I hope I am)1 you (not only Andya, whoever) are muslim because of having being born in a muslim family or through study or by conversion
2 you accept everything appears in the version and/or translation you regard as authentic of the quran (by 'version' I am referring to the versions dicussed in "Which is the Real Quran" thread)
3 when something that appears in it is hard to believe or accept, you believe it directly anyway, or you look for all ways to justify the possible reasons behind it.Peace Elena,
1 I was born in a Muslim family.
2 Correct, but not from 'translations', from the original Arabic text. But please show me if the qisas verses were somehow 'variable' in the 'versions' you mentioned.
3 On some cases, yes. But I'm not clear as why you ask this.
-
Well, don't make a stereotype out of scientists. Scientists are not a homogenous crowd. And they kill little animals all the time.
I did not mean to stereotype scientists, it just that all the scientist I know of are against the death penalty hence my question. And I did not imply that all scientist are saints. But we are talking about death penalty on free willed human individuals as oppose to killing little animals in laboratory experiments...
My pro-death stance comes from the qisas verses in the Qur'an.
Ok. It is a matter of belief for you.
If you were to think outside the quran - would you still be Pro-death Penalty?
Regards,