Punishment is no ideal

I think the human mind (psyche/soul/ we don't know what it is) will always be resistant to legislation. Harsh punishments may satisfy many and may be justifiable for some of the heinous "things" that people are doing to each other, but they often only cause the cycle to keep repeating itself.

I tend to think the teaching of Christ is probably the best intervention/method; it's certainly the hardest to live up to when someone has inflicted something terrible upon you and yours.

I do wonder why the message hasn't been received loud and clear from the tens of thousands of NDE reports--that we're all going to be effectively confronted with our actions. We're all going to feel any significant pain we've caused others whether we like it or not. "God" (I don't mean the judgement of the almighty) only knows what this is going to be like for some of the (apparently*) totally heartless/reckless individuals.

The choice (to behave badly) has to allowed, though. To completely try to suppress that inherent aspect of the human psyche, could only be achieved (if at all) by unacceptable restrictions on us. Surely the cure would be worse than the disease.

(*If everything is predestined then it's pointless worrying about it)

I do think this one of the great challenges for moral societies, the weaving of Justice and Mercy.

I can see the potential value in crimes committed having equivalent punishments, and it's easy for me to wax on about Mercy while others are bereft with loved ones, left broken by hard hearted criminals, etc...but I think Justice is best seen, in some way, as a necessity of our terrestrial state while seeking a better path. The author Matthew Stover once said, "Justice is only justice if its specific"...but as he points out it would take some fantastical abilities to address all the specifics of any individual life.

Again, admittedly a declaration for Mercy is an easy thing to type out over morning tea, sitting in comfort...

"Our way is the way of peace. Non-violence takes time."

"But do we have the time your Holiness?"

"That...I have never known."
  -Kundun

I do think this one of the great challenges for moral societies, the weaving of Justice and Mercy.

I can see the potential value in crimes committed having equivalent punishments, and it's easy for me to wax on about Mercy while others are bereft with loved ones, left broken by hard hearted criminals, etc...but I think Justice is best seen, in some way, as a necessity of our terrestrial state while seeking a better path. The author Matthew Stover once said, "Justice is only justice if its specific"...but as he points out it would take some fantastical abilities to address all the specifics of any individual life.

Again, admittedly a declaration for Mercy is an easy thing to type out over morning tea, sitting in comfort...

"Our way is the way of peace. Non-violence takes time."

"But do we have the time your Holiness?"

"That...I have never known."
  -Kundun

I don't want to sound hard on the families of crime victims and I sympathise with them as much as anybody else but their feelings are no indication of what is right and wrong to do with the perpetrator.  I am actually quite conservative with regards law and order and mercy isn't my intention at all.  With regards capital punishment, my question is simply "what is achieved by killing the criminal that isn't achieved by life imprisonment?"  Your Stover quote makesme think again, what precisely is the difference between justice and revenge?  Should the law be concerned with getting revenge on behalf of the victim or his/her family?  Is not the law's concern protection rather than specifically punishment?  I have seen no evidence in life that like for like works at all.

I don't want to sound hard on the families of crime victims and I sympathise with them as much as anybody else but their feelings are no indication of what is right and wrong to do with the perpetrator.  I am actually quite conservative with regards law and order and mercy isn't my intention at all.  With regards capital punishment, my question is simply "what is achieved by killing the criminal that isn't achieved by life imprisonment?"  Your Stover quote makesme think again, what precisely is the difference between justice and revenge?  Should the law be concerned with getting revenge on behalf of the victim or his/her family?  Is not the law's concern protection rather than specifically punishment?  I have seen no evidence in life that like for like works at all.

I don't disagree with you, but I think we have to admit that often times it is easy to talk of mercy when we aren't the victims of some heinous crime.

Perhaps there are victims who would say a stricter penalty could've saved them [and] also save future victims.

There are no easy answers, and every moral pronouncement carries heavy weight is really I was getting at.

With regards capital punishment, my question is simply "what is achieved by killing the criminal that isn't achieved by life imprisonment?"

The two are quite different.

When a life ends there are possibilities for two things, one a life review and a chance to see things from different perspectives. Then there is a possible fresh incarnation with a genuinely new start, what happens next is then not clear, it could turn into a repeat performance, or maybe a different path.

Life imprisonment. What is this exactly? Is it meant to be rehabilitation or punishment, or is it merely to protect the rest of society? The problems of imprisonment are many fold, even those in charge don't seem quite certain what the purpose is, but most are agreed that such institutions are problematic. And then, at the end of it all, if it truly is a life sentence, the person then moves on to a next life. Are they then in a better position to do better next time, or has the experience during the term made reform more problematic?

I don't know the answers, but I do think we need to take a longer view, not just in terms of the individual, but of the future society which we our children and grandchildren will inhabit, populated by beings reincarnated from lives in our time. What would we like to sow in order for future generations to reap?

The two are quite different.

When a life ends there are possibilities for two things, one a life review and a chance to see things from different perspectives. Then there is a possible fresh incarnation with a genuinely new start, what happens next is then not clear, it could turn into a repeat performance, or maybe a different path.

Life imprisonment. What is this exactly? Is it meant to be rehabilitation or punishment, or is it merely to protect the rest of society? The problems of imprisonment are many fold, even those in charge don't seem quite certain what the purpose is, but most are agreed that such institutions are problematic. And then, at the end of it all, if it truly is a life sentence, the person then moves on to a next life. Are they then in a better position to do better next time, or has the experience during the term made reform more problematic?

I don't know the answers, but I do think we need to take a longer view, not just in terms of the individual, but of the future society which we our children and grandchildren will inhabit, populated by beings reincarnated from lives in our time. What would we like to sow in order for future generations to reap?

I wouldn't want to base our penal system on "spiritual" speculation.  Let's at least try to base it as far as possible on known consensual reality.

The two are quite different.

When a life ends there are possibilities for two things, one a life review and a chance to see things from different perspectives. Then there is a possible fresh incarnation with a genuinely new start, what happens next is then not clear, it could turn into a repeat performance, or maybe a different path.

Life imprisonment. What is this exactly? Is it meant to be rehabilitation or punishment, or is it merely to protect the rest of society? The problems of imprisonment are many fold, even those in charge don't seem quite certain what the purpose is, but most are agreed that such institutions are problematic. And then, at the end of it all, if it truly is a life sentence, the person then moves on to a next life. Are they then in a better position to do better next time, or has the experience during the term made reform more problematic?

I don't know the answers, but I do think we need to take a longer view, not just in terms of the individual, but of the future society which we our children and grandchildren will inhabit, populated by beings reincarnated from lives in our time. What would we like to sow in order for future generations to reap?

I wouldn't want to base our penal system on "spiritual" speculation.  Let's at least try to base it as far as possible on known consensual reality.

I think we can take on both, to some degree. I would agree with Brian that it would be dangerous to start assuming things about the afterlife as a justification for government-sanctioned-execution.

But I don't think Typoz was necessarily advocating for the death penalty either.

But I don't think Typoz was necessarily advocating for the death penalty either.

Now I've read it again no.  Sorry Typoz.

Though I think I raised more questions than answers, there are two parts of my previous post which I think perhaps we can if not agree on, at least relate to. First, that the theoretical purpose and practical implementation of the prison system is something which could probably be improved upon. Second, that whatever we do, it isn't just the immediate problems of this moment which we need to consider, but those which will unfold three months, ten years or even centuries in the future.

I think even those of an atheist/materialist leaning would be able to consider those as realistic concerns.

I might add though that perhaps from my perspective, I see the possibility of repercussions in terms of cause and effect, where the materialist might draw a solid line and consider things from a more blinkered perspective. Equally one might argue, some traditional religions might hand over responsibility to some higher power, and also see no such repercussions.

Perhaps what I'm saying might be considered in a similar light to environmentalism. We have concern for the planetary environment in a forward-looking way, I'm suggesting that we should be concerned in a similar manner with the spiritual environment, right here on this planet, in a forward-looking way.