What part of "Thou Shalt not kill" don't we understand? - Consider This by JD Consider This by JD

What part of “Thou Shalt not kill” don’t we understand?

I don’t like it when authors quote the Bible to justify a position, because, I think, so many people use the Bible to advance very narrow interests and not the expansive message of love and compassion that authors like Richard Rohr advocate. But then there’s that old adage, “Never say never,” which allows me to extol a wonderful piece, with compelling references to the Bible, written by Margaret Renkl about the death penalty “What part of ‘Thou shalt not kill’ don’t we understand?”

As Renkl points out, the death penalty is wrong for a variety of reasons. It’s expensive, fails to deter crime, is racially biased and doesn’t take into account rehabilitation, and it seems to follow along the red-blue political divide. Those points aside, Renkl points to poignant biblical passages:

“But my own reason for wanting to end the death penalty is simpler than any of these arguments, as compelling as they truly are. As a Christian, I keep coming back to exhortations like ‘Thou shalt not kill’ and ‘He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone’ and ‘Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.’ It seems to me that Jesus was very clear on this question of mercy. At his own execution, he prayed, ‘Father forgive them, they know not what they do.’”

We spend an enormous amount of time and money executing offenders, and the effort has increased lately as the manufacturers of drugs used in executions are refusing to make their products available for executions. In a cosmic sort of way, there’s something profoundly unbalanced in exerting so much effort in killing the killers when we can sentence them to life without parole.

___________________________

Jack D’Aurora writes for Considerthisbyjd.com

_______________________________________________

8
SEP

John C. Calhoun September 9, 2019

The author seems to be hung up on the costs of protecting society from those who would violate the most essential right of society, to provide for protection for the LIFE of its citizens. This is a God given right but must be protected by the collective for there even to be a society. I will not argue the thou shall not kill argument as it is not credible, given the Old Testament but more so it is inhumane. The simplest of arguments will forever exist, that if we did not stop the Nazi’s and Japanese, not one Jew or Chinaman would exist in today’s world.

I have long been an advocate for isolation of those convicted of there own personal act of inhumanity. Yes creation of giant penal colonies not prisons would be an appropriate response to the death penalty. As the Bill of Rights provides for Life. Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness as it penultimate objective, the act of murdering another citizen is in essence a denial of constitutional rights. Although we live in a democratic republic where states are sovereign, the ultimate sovereign is the Constitution. Our mutual covenant with each other citizen (please note citizen). Once the State has convicted a citizen of murder, the US Government should prosecute that same person for denial of the rights of the victim. There should be a standard penalty and swift adjudication. The government no longer be in the business of executing those who would execute us. I am quite sure murders living among murders would short things out rather quickly. Also we would slash costs to minimums by making those in isolation self sufficient for food and shelter. Did not all humans start by being self sufficient, so how would that be cruel? Certainly not unusual.
reply
Ron Plymale September 9, 2019

You ask what part of “thou shalt not kill” do we not understand?. I would answer: “all of it” . The Commandments were handed to us by the Jews in what Christians call the “Old Testament”. Yet the writings that follow are replete with descriptions of war with its’ accompanying death of multitudes. In these descriptions of great battles and prolific deaths, the Jews are seemingly aided to triumph by God himself. The instruction of this Commandment.is an object lesson in contradiction and hypocrisy. While I typically identify with political “progressives”, I have no problem with the concept of the death penalty – only its’ execution. Perhaps, rather than expending our energy attempting to abolish death as a punishment we should work toward expediting the process (thereby cutting the expense) by limiting the appeal process. While there is a lack of equity in its’ imposition we continue to progress in establishing better standards for imposition.
reply
- jdaurora@behallaw.com September 9, 2019
  
  Well, there is such a thing as the New Testament, which is the source of the quotes in my piece.
  reply
Kay G. September 10, 2019

Any views on religion and the death penalty should include the fact that a high percentage of those prisoners on death row have been found innocent (even those who have already been killed). Also, how does Christianity address the fact that we have an UNEQUAL justice system in this country. As the notable Bryan Stevenson, Esquire reminds us, those on death row are those without the economic means to hire the best attorneys to avoid the death penalty. Americans who support the death penalty and call themselves Christian do not come near to the teachings of Christ. He reached out to all, with no regard for bank accounts or color.
reply
Steven Franckhauser October 17, 2019

Jack….when Jesus uttered his plea of forgiveness for his executioners by proclaiming “…they know not what they do”, do you believe Jesus meant that they did not know they were taking a human life? That does not makes sense to me. Surely death was the outcome because that was the sentence.
Or do you think Jesus meant that his executioners did not realize He was the son of God?
Might the pleas of Jesus have been for the entire human race and thus a general prayer for forgiveness for all humans, not just those who were assigned the grim task of torturing and killing Him?
Are there perhaps other motives behind the pleas of Jesus?
Can one forgive and still punish?
I’m trying to understand your argument in support of your position.
reply
- jdaurora@behallaw.com October 17, 2019
  
  For starters, the reference to Christ’s last words on the cross weren’t part of an argument I made. I wasn’t smart enough to come up with the idea. Margaret Renkl was. That point aside, I think Renkl uses the quote to convey the idea that we should be less concerned with vengeance, which is the foundation for the death penalty. As the argument goes (I think), if Christ could forgive those who crucified him, then shouldn’t we be willing to forgo killing offenders? This is not to say we don’t hold them accountable. Certainly, we must, but we can do that without executing them. Glad to have you as a reader.
  reply