Murderers Must Die: Judeo-Christian Values

[Torog]

Murderers Must Die: Judeo-Christian Values, Part XVIII (Dennis Prager Alert)
Townhall.com ^ | 07/19/05 | Dennis Prager


Posted on 07/18/2005 10:38:06 PM PDT


One should not confuse Jews or Christians with Judeo-Christian values. Many Jews and many Christians, including many sincerely religious ones, take certain positions that are contrary to Judeo-Christian values (which I have defined at length: In a nutshell, they are Old Testament values as mediated by Christians, especially American Christians).

One clear example is the death penalty for murderers. Many Jews and Christians believe that all murderers should be kept alive, that it is not only wrong to take the life of any murderer; it is actually un-Jewish or un-Christian.

Jews opposed to capital punishment cite the Talmud (the second most important religious text to Jews), which is largely opposed to capital punishment; Christians opponents cite Jesus on loving one's enemies, for example; and Catholic abolitionists cite the late Pope John Paul II and the many cardinals and bishops who, though not denying all of the Church's teachings on the permissibility of the state to take the life a murderer, largely oppose capital punishment.

Yet, the notion that a murderer must give up his life is one of the central values in the Old Testament. Indeed, taking the life of a murderer is the only law that is found in all Five Books of Moses (the Torah). That is particularly remarkable considering how few laws there are at all in the first Book, Genesis.

When God creates the world, He declares a fundamental value and law to maintain civilization: "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God He created him." And the law is repeated in Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy.

When all murderers are allowed to keep their lives, murder is rendered less serious and human life is therefore cheapened. That is not only the Judeo-Christian biblical view. It is common sense. The punishment for a crime is what informs society how bad that crime is. A society that allows all murderers to live deems murder less awful than one that takes away the life of a murderer.

There are those who argue that precisely because they so value human life, they oppose the taking of a murderer's life. They argue that you cannot teach that killing is wrong by killing. But that is the same as arguing that you can't teach that stealing is wrong by taking away a thief's money or that you can't teach that kidnapping is wrong by kidnapping (i.e., imprisoning) kidnappers.

To the Torah, the first source of Judeo-Christian values, murder is the great sin; the immoral shedding of human blood (as opposed to the moral shedding of human blood in self-defense or in a just war) pollutes the world. That is why the Torah legislated that even an animal that killed a human should be put to death. The purpose was not to punish the animal -- animals do not have free choice, hence cannot be morally culpable. And it was hardly to teach other animals not to kill. It was because a human life is so valuable, it cannot be taken without the taker losing its life.

But, some will object, the Torah decrees the death penalty for many infractions, yet we don't put to death people who practice witchcraft, commit adultery or other capital infractions -- why those who murder?

There are two answers.

First, the only capital crime mentioned before there were any Jews or Israel (in Genesis when God creates the world) is murder. Other death penalties applied specifically to the people of Israel when they entered the Land of Israel -- a special code of behavior for a special time in a special place. And virtually none of those were carried out. The primary purpose of declaring a sin worthy of capital punishment was not actually to execute the sinner, but to declare how serious the infraction was when a society was establishing itself as the first based on ethical monotheism. Capital punishment for murder, on the other hand, was obviously intended for all time and for all people -- it is independent of the existence of Jews and declared to be fundamental to the existence of a humane order.

Second, all the other death penalties are laws. The death penalty for murder is not only a law; it is a value. Laws may be time bound. Values are eternal. Thus, the Christians who believe in the divinity of the Torah are not bound to the Torah's dietary laws (such as not eating pork and shellfish); but they are bound to the value of taking the life of murderers.

Finally, the Old Testament is preoccupied with justice. And allowing one who has unjustly deprived another person of life to keep his own is the ultimate injustice.

There are many good reasons to be wary of taking the lives of murderers -- such as insufficient evidence, corrupted witnesses, distinguishing between premeditated murder and a crime of passion -- but love of life or a commitment to biblically based values are not among them.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Although it seems an anomaly to some, the fact that conservatives oppose abortion and favor the death penalty, while liberals are on opposite sides, has a basis in the same issue - the value of human life.

The key in the difference between valuing the life of the unborn and not that of a murderer is innocence. Who can be more innocent than an unborn baby? As far as the murderer, the life being valued is that of the victim, not the murderer. To value the killer more than the victim of itself devalues innocence and life.

Torog Reviewed by Torog on 07-19-2005. Murderers Must Die: Judeo-Christian Values Murderers Must Die: Judeo-Christian Values, Part XVIII (Dennis Prager Alert) Townhall.com ^ | 07/19/05 | Dennis Prager Posted on 07/18/2005 10:38:06 PM PDT One should not confuse Jews or Christians with Judeo-Christian values. Many Jews and many Christians, including many sincerely religious ones, take certain positions that are contrary to Judeo-Christian values (which I have defined at length: In a nutshell, they are Old Testament values as mediated by Christians, especially Rating: 5

[F L E S H]

Don't waste your time Torog, the christian right will always be hypocritical. Killing = equals murder, no matter whether it's some guy who's doing or it's the state.

In the end, WHO CARES what's written in the old testament? It's a different law written for a different time, and now, as it becomes convenient to you, you pick and choose which laws to follow and which to ignore.

I know you don't believe in Darwinian evolution, but can you at least concede that human consciousness has evolved over the past 5,000 years? Now, does it make sense to you to apply the same laws that were applied 5,000 years ago, in a society so completely different from our we can't even imagine it?

What about the Middle Ages? I have a name of noble origin, am I allowed to pssess serfs and make them work my land for a tribute? Can I become king and get my own knights? I can find old law codes that state anything I damn well please, it doesn't mean we have to follow them!

[Nullific]

OH MY GOD FRANCE IS 20% TERRORISTS!

[potpimp]

I dont base my opinions on the death penalty or abortion on 2000 year old fairy tales

[bhallg2k]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." - First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes." - Thomas Jefferson

"Ecclesiastical establishments tend to great ignorance and corruption, all of which facilitate the execution of mischievous projects." - James Madison

"What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not." - James Madison

"The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses." - John Adams



Man, I wish people would start realizing that our country was not founded with Judeo-Christian values in mind.

[F L E S H]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." - First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes." - Thomas Jefferson

"Ecclesiastical establishments tend to great ignorance and corruption, all of which facilitate the execution of mischievous projects." - James Madison

"What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not." - James Madison

"The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses." - John Adams



Man, I wish people would start realizing that our country was not founded with Judeo-Christian values in mind.

Thanks. Noone believes me when I say the same thing. Why do people think the founding fathers were religious zealots, when in fact they were extremely anti-religious, in a way that would get them in trouble today if they said tese things publicly?

[nicholasstanko]

why cant we just kill murderers?

what purpose do they serve if we lock them up for the rest of their lives? why would you want to keep paying for a serial killer to have three meals a day and free health care?

why would you want to keep jam-packing the prison system?


is it because prisoners labour to make 20 cents an hour? is it because they provide jobs for all that security and big prisons mean more government funding?


man, i hope not *winks*



let's roll.

[F L E S H]

what purpose do they serve if we lock them up for the rest of their lives? why would you want to keep paying for a serial killer to have three meals a day and free health care?

that might very be true, I think in some extreme cases, it might be justifiable to ahve the death penalty.

why would you want to keep jam-packing the prison system?

but that argument isn't effective to support the death penalty. It's not murderers who are packing up the prisons, it's the guys who get arrested for selling or smoking weed and other such kind of 'criminals'. Killing all the murderers won't even come close to solving that problem.

[F L E S H]

In the end though, I don't really have too strong an opinion on the death pnelty debate. What I find stupid is people using the bible to try to justify the death-penalty.

[pisshead]

the founders were not anti-religious at all. that's incredible.

they wrote the world 'god' and 'creator' and 'created' throughout lots of their writings...read the federalist and anti-federalist papers.

they all didn't believe in god, but they weren't anti-religious.