An Immoral Society Abandons Capital Punishment

Capital punishment is pretty much the only form of killing people that the left does not support, which is telling.

Children, the elderly, and the disabled all make the list of acceptable people to murder through means of abortion, euthanasia, and various other forms of eugenics but when it comes to the just execution of convicted criminals, they must for some reason be “rehabilitated.”

We are at the crazy point where organ trafficking murdered children’s body parts is legitimate business but the state execution of a Crimean, convicted of heinous crimes is “unconstituional”. It’s a pity babies don’t get a rehab option.

Even why they cry hypocrisy at us regarding our support of capital punishment and simultaneous rejection of abortion, it serves only to expose a morally bankrupt ideology as the one with real double standards that preserves the criminal and punishes the innocent.

Dave Jolly’s article reveals one case of the ludicrous bondage our society has stepped ourselves into by abandoning capital punishment:

Which is crueler?

The rape and murder of a mother and her two daughters or the execution of the man who did it?

To liberals the answer is simple – they believe that it’s crueler to execute the criminal than what he did to his victims. Their solution is to allow the criminal to spend the rest of his life in prison at a cost of over $100,000 per year to taxpayers. How many of you make $100,000 a year? I sure don’t!

Explain that to William Petit of Cheshire, Connecticut. Two men had invaded his home. They raped and murdered his wife, murdered his two daughters and thought they had killed him before setting the house on fire. Petit survived and was able to help identify the two men who were arrested, tried, convicted and sentenced to death.

That is until the Connecticut State Supreme Court betrayed him and his family by declaring the death penalty in Connecticut to be unconstitutional. In a 4-3 decision, the majority agreed that the death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment and that it no longer fits with the values of our evolved society and that it no longer serves as a useful form of punishment.

Chief Justice Chase T. Rogers disagreed with the majority decision. In his dissent, he accused the majority ruling members of the court of being fundamentally flawed at every step of their ruling. She wrote:

“The majority’s determination that the death penalty is unconstitutional under our state’s constitution is based on a house of cards, falling under the slightest breath of scrutiny.”

“…the majority disregards the obvious: the legislature, which represents the people of the state and is the best indicator of contemporary societal mores, expressly retained the death penalty.” [Referring to pre-2012 crimes.]

Justice Carmen E. Espinoza also was a dissenter in the ruling saying that the death penalty did meet the current values of decency and punishment. She also encouraged the legislature to re-visit the issue by saying that the court’s decision did not necessarily ‘strike a dagger into the hearth of the death penalty.’ In her dissent she wrote:

“Because the majority opinion has grounded its decision on the conclusion, albeit incorrect, that the death penalty no longer comports with evolving standards of decency, the legislature has the power to reenact the death penalty. As the majority recognizes, there is nothing that requires that the standards of decency evolve only in one direction.”

Justice Peter T. Zarella wrote a third dissent with Justice Espinosa stating:

“If the legislature, as the majority claims, had rejected the death penalty only on the ground that it is barbaric, excessive, arbitrary and discriminatory, then why would it have enacted a retention provision specifically allowing executions to go forward for all current death row inmates, and why would it have permitted future arrests, indictments, the commencement of trials, and executions to be carried out with respect to those who had not yet been charged with a capital crime but who had committed such a crime before the effective date of [the revised law]?”

The court’s decision affects 11 death row inmates including the two men who attacked the Petit family.

Petit responded to the state’s high court decision, saying:

“The dissenting justices clearly state how the four members of the majority have disregarded keystones of our governmental structure such as the separation of powers and the role of judicial precedent to reach the decision they hand down today. The death penalty and its application is a highly charged topic with profound emotional impact, particularly on the victims and their loved ones. Justice Espinosa, in her dissent especially, forcefully and compassionately recognizes that devastating impact.”

The death penalty is a very controversial issue with many people, liberals and conservatives. I know of many Christians who are against the death penalty but I am not one of them.

If the death penalty is so cruel and wrong, then why did God Himself give us His laws that required the death penalty for a number of crimes including murder and homosexuality? Yes, Jesus did fulfill the Law and made the Temple law no longer valid but He did not replace or do away with the criminal or corporal laws of the Old Testament. If He had then the Ten Commandments no longer are valid, are they?

When the harlot was about to be stoned to death, Jesus told the crowd that let he who is without sin cast the first stone and then forgave the harlot and told her to go and sin no more. He did not abolish the death penalty rather he was making a point that we are all sinners and look at our own sins and that we need to be careful about accusing and judging others.

True that God is a God of love and Jesus preached love, but God is also a God of justice who will one day again judge the world. He raises up nations and He brings down nations, as He is currently doing to America for turning away from Him.

Saying all of that, I believe that the death penalty is more just and humane than bilking taxpayers out of hundreds of thousands of dollars to allow criminals to rot in jail for the rest of their lives. I also believe that executions should be made public because public executions do serve as a deterrent to some who will think twice before committing murder, thus saving lives.

The problem with our penal system today is that too many bleeding hearts have made it impossible to actually punishment criminals for their crimes. They are far more concerned with the treatment of criminals than they are with their victims and the family of the victims. Ironically many of these are the same bleeding heart liberals that support murdering millions of unborn children.

How many times have you heard of someone robbing, beating, raping or murdering someone while they were out on parole or probation? A 25 year sentence usually means that the person could be released in as little as 5 to 7 years. What kind of deterrent is that? A 25 year sentence should mean 25 years. Yes, you guessed it, I’m 100% against parole or probation because I’ve seen and heard of far too many people being victimized by criminals freed early.

Perhaps if our penal system did what it’s supposed to do and stopped letting every one out of prison early, we may not have as much crime. There are many criminals who say that jail is not a deterrent, especially for a first offense because they know they’ll walk with little or no time served. But if they knew that early release is no longer an option and that they’ll be serving their full sentence, and then maybe they’ll start thinking twice before committing the crime.

I say it’s time to institute ‘do the crime – do the time’ or ‘you take a life – you forfeit your life.’

The end of the age will be a time where Jesus returns to execute judgment and quite literally execute the evil kings of the nations. Likewise, the Millennial Kingdom described in scripture suggests that non-believers who survive the coming trouble will be subject to the Torah of God, including a perfectly just capital punishment under king Jesus.

It’s time to get some perspective about where our society is headed with regard to the laws that it adopts and the ones it abandons. In abandoning God, we are also abandoning wisdom and while our society has been perfect, it sure beats plenty that have existed because of our former reliance upon God.

Jesus is coming and he is coming as a king who treads the wine press of his fury against the antichrist Kingdom and nations who pledge him allegiance.

“Behold, a day is coming for the Lord, when the spoil taken from you will be divided in your midst. For I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle, and the city shall be taken and the houses plundered and the women raped. Half of the city shall go out into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be cut off from the city. Then the Lord will go out and fight against those nations as when he fights on a day of battle. On that day his feet shall stand on the Mount of Olives that lies before Jerusalem on the east, and the Mount of Olives shall be split in two from east to west by a very wide valley, so that one half of the Mount shall move northward, and the other half southward. And you shall flee to the valley of my mountains, for the valley of the mountains shall reach to Azal. And you shall flee as you fled from the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. Then the Lord my God will come, and all the holy ones with him. On that day there shall be no light, cold, or frost. And there shall be a unique day, which is known to the Lord, neither day nor night, but at evening time there shall be light. On that day living waters shall flow out from Jerusalem, half of them to the eastern sea and half of them to the western sea. It shall continue in summer as in winter. And the Lord will be king over all the earth. On that day the Lord will be one and his name one. The whole land shall be turned into a plain from Geba to Rimmon south of Jerusalem. But Jerusalem shall remain aloft on its site from the Gate of Benjamin to the place of the former gate, to the Corner Gate, and from the Tower of Hananel to the king’s winepresses. And it shall be inhabited, for there shall never again be a decree of utter destruction. Jerusalem shall dwell in security. And this shall be the plague with which the Lord will strike all the peoples that wage war against Jerusalem: their flesh will rot while they are still standing on their feet, their eyes will rot in their sockets, and their tongues will rot in their mouths. And on that day a great panic from the Lord shall fall on them, so that each will seize the hand of another, and the hand of the one will be raised against the hand of the other. Even Judah will fight at Jerusalem. And the wealth of all the surrounding nations shall be collected, gold, silver, and garments in great abundance. And a plague like this plague shall fall on the horses, the mules, the camels, the donkeys, and whatever beasts may be in those camps. Then everyone who survives of all the nations that have come against Jerusalem shall go up year after year to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, and to keep the Feast of Booths. And if any of the families of the earth do not go up to Jerusalem to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, there will be no rain on them. And if the family of Egypt does not go up and present themselves, then on them there shall be no rain; there shall be the plague with which the Lord afflicts the nations that do not go up to keep the Feast of Booths. This shall be the punishment to Egypt and the punishment to all the nations that do not go up to keep the Feast of Booths. And on that day there shall be inscribed on the bells of the horses, “Holy to the Lord.” And the pots in the house of the Lord shall be as the bowls before the altar. And every pot in Jerusalem and Judah shall be holy to the Lord of hosts, so that all who sacrifice may come and take of them and boil the meat of the sacrifice in them. And there shall no longer be a trader in the house of the Lord of hosts on that day.” ‭‭Zechariah‬ ‭14:1-21‬ ‭ESV‬‬


5 thoughts on “An Immoral Society Abandons Capital Punishment

  1. Respectfully, I think most death penalty opponents’ position on the matter is not one of rehabilitation of the condemned. Rather, it is one of arbitrary application, racial bias in sentencing, and the number of those who have been exonerated of their crimes after spending years on death row. There is also a cost effective analysis that comes into play as well, with LWOP clearly winning over capital punishment. Nebraska’s recent abolition is a great example of the latter.


    • Thanks Gentalks,

      I agree that these are certainly good reasons to apply capital punishment carefully and lawfully but abolishing the institution merely creates new problems of injustice.

      The basic premise is not that capital punishment will always be used justly and correctly – it obviously isn’t – but rather that it has a legitimate place in a just society.

      Considering the race issue a bit further, Margaret Sanger worked hard to apply her eugenics to the removal of black society and her success continues to this day – yet from many of those who are against capital punishment for racial reasons (and not suggesting any of these are your own positions), we hear nothing but support for Planned Parenthood. The death penalty for criminals – even in the few cases where there is an unjust conviction – has only the tiniest fraction of impact compared with the death penalty that is liberally applied to babies in nations that have abandoned the death penalty because it has been unjustly applied.

      This kind of faulty thinking is endemic in our society and reflects the overarching problems we have that allow evil to thrive and prevents government from doing its biblical job – to punish wrongdoing.

      Likewise, the imperfection of marriage has been used by its proponents to redefine marriage altogether in the name of “justice” but all it does is create further injustice for the upcoming generations of children.

      I’m an imperfect husband and father – that’s reason to become better, not quit the job. The same is true for capital punishment.


      • I would have to disagree with the planned parenthood straw man argument. The question of abortion (as legislated) applies to a woman’s right to privacy. The rest is a argument pertaining to how much legal authority we should give states to legislate matters pertaining to a woman’s body post-conception. It’s pretty simple, really. It’s a question of Government authority over the human body. And it’s a partisan issue, not a biblical issue. One we’ve litigating for 40 years. Many who would not personally have an abortion also recognize it is not the place of the government to legislate a woman’s right to decide what’s best for her reproductive health. As for collateral criminals, I’d rather 20 guilty walk free, than have a single innocent executed. To me, that humanity is what sets us apart. And the argument is changing. I hear more Christians calling for mercy and abolition now, with the so-called “new atheists” (Sam Harris and the like) taking the lead on support for positions like capital punishment. Oddly enough with the anti-Islamic, pro-fear Christians being in lock step with their supposed opposites. It’s really interesting to watch. Still, I try and focus on what I can change. I was a teen mother. My mom tried to force me to have an abortion, and I said no, so I’ve been in that seat. I knew the decision would change my life, but I’m happy with the decision I made. I just realize I cannot make it for anyone else, nor should I try. Anyway, that’s enough for now. Peace to you.


      • In talking about this being biblical, I’m saying that since every individual and every government will give an account to Jesus, everything really is a biblical issue. It’s not like there is some exclusive realms of society where God is not interested in his will being done or where Christians should just put up and shut up because the world does not recognise God as sovereign. The world has their own wisdom and will be held accountable and we will be held to a higher standard so I’m really only interested in the biblical perspective and that’s where I am coming from.

        Jesus enacted capital punishment in the Torah (pre-incarnate but always in full agreement with his Father) and it clearly wasn’t always used just,y but he did it nonetheless and he has given the governments of the world the authority to use it. It won’t matter to a non-Christian but the Christian who wants to argue capital punishment is wrong or should be abolished must confront the biblical precedence God himself established in the society of his chosen people in the context of their inherent sinfulness. Scripture makes a noteworthy claim:

        “See, I have taught you statutes and rules, as the Lord my God commanded me, that you should do them in the land that you are entering to take possession of it. Keep them and do them, for that will be your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the peoples, who, when they hear all these statutes, will say, ‘Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.’ For what great nation is there that has a god so near to it as the Lord our God is to us, whenever we call upon him? And what great nation is there, that has statutes and rules so righteous as all this law that I set before you today?” Deuteronomy‬ ‭4:5-8‬ ‭ESV‬‬

        “So righteous as all this law” doesn’t make any exemptions of capital punishment so it’s reasonable to suggest that for certain crimes it is indeed righteous and just punishment.

        Christians today do indeed advocate against capital punishment but shifting opinions doesn’t necessarily make a sound or biblical argument, nor does Harris’ atheism make his a bad argument (though I’m guessing it is not a biblically based one).

        Christians today advocate and practise a lot of things that are eroding the good in our society from abortion to euthanasia to redefining marriage to sex and nudity saturated HBO programs. Christians yesterday sang louder to drown out the noise of passing trains carrying the Jews to the furnace. Only a minority stood up the the Third Reich then and it seems that a minority fight for what is right today on the aforementioned issues because our society has been significantly moulded by naturalistic humanism.

        God will certainly bring justice in the end but in the mean time we have the choice to live in a society where criminals are justly punished according to the extent of their crime and given the death penalty where appropriate or we can live in a society that treats criminals as victims of poverty and lack of education as though humanity is inherently good but just a little misguided sometimes – things that humanist indoctrination will solve. This is the common perspective I get from Christian and non-Christian alike in support of abolishing capital punishment and it reflects a close association to naturalism and humanism, not biblical Christianity.

        We can agree to disagree and certainly remain brothers and sisters in Christ but we still have to live with the consequences of our choices, individually and across our society. I don’t believe capital punishment is the most pressing issue nor the most impacting but I would argue it’s one more sign that the West, and many Christians along with it, has abandoned biblical wisdom in favour of humanist wisdom and that’s why we have to explain why being pro-life and pro-capital punishment are actually biblically sound, complimentary positions.

        Peace to you also!


Feel free to discuss.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s