Forgiveness

[Koldo]

When I said you’re ultimately forgiving I was just stating that again to reinforce the beginning of our conversation then you went on a tangent talking about killing people

Oh, but it is not a tangent. I am saying there are people on this world that I would appreciate to see getting killed because of their wrongdoings. And since you have said I have forgiven them, I am left wondering if you find me wanting to see them getting killed as being compatible with the forgiveness you claim I have granted them. After all, there is no anger involved.

 

[InChrist]

It is an interesting aspect of humans. I asked myself why I evem associate with her in the first place, because although she's fun to be around. Emotionally it can't be much more than that because at some point she's goint to try to take advantage of it.
And, truly, it's because we're intellectual equals. That's rare enough for me in life I only met a few in college. And other than personal information I can discuss things with her and concepts most don't understand. She's also college educated so understands the lingo as well as being familiar with autism enough that I don't have to think as much about what I'm saying.
Amd even though I have to occasionally evaluate things, it's better than people thinking you're trying to intellectually intimidate and dominate everyone. Those sorts are typically insecure anyways, and not used to being around, I assume, intellectual autistics who know a lot about a lot.

Thanks for sharing your experience and insights. I suppose under the circumstances, if you are going to spend time with her, it’s important to be on guard and remain aware of any manipulative tactics coming up during your interactions with her.
Have a good night.

 

[Jimmy]

Oh, but it is not a tangent. I am saying there are people on this world that I would appreciate to see getting killed because of their wrongdoings. And since you have said I have forgiven them, I am left wondering if you find me wanting to see them getting killed as being compatible with the forgiveness you claim I have granted them. After all, there is no anger involved.

No anger? Ok

 

[Trailblazer]

I'm no therapist so it's only IMO but suicide is as personal a matter as it gets and it's not really about anyone else. So while you feel the loss, I don't know if it's a matter of someone needing to make amends for taking their own life. The people left behind feel a range of emotions but I don't know if I would frame it in my mind as that person having wronged me.

Suicide might be a personal matter except in the case of a husband and wife. I have been suicidal many times but I would never have left my husband behind and that is one reason why I never killed myself. Yet my husband threatened suicide a lot and he never cared about leaving me behind. I talked him out of it the other times but this time I could not talk to him because I could not get to the hospital where he was and he would not talk to me on the phone. The few times I did get him on the phone he told me he was eating but he lied to me becaue I verified with the nurses that he was not eating.

I also believe that suicide is wrong in the eyes of God and although it can be forgiven there are consequences for the person who make that choice. Most people do regret committing suicide. I always knew suicide was wrong even though I wanted to die so I held on and got the help I needed. It was a long hard road and I struggled for years. My strong faith in God is the only thing that got me through.

I have had known people who've committed suicide, I just didn't see it that way. If he is trying to reach you, it could well be that's the message he's seeking to convey, "it wasn't meant to hurt you, and I'm sorry that you are, but it was my decision for me."

That might very well be the message, or he might tell me that he just could not tolerate the pain anymore and he had no desire to live so he thought it was better not to accept the cancer treatment that was offered. That would not have been a cure but he could have lived longer, how much longer nobody knows. Most cancer patients fight to stay alive but not all do. My sister fought to stay alive till her very last breath and she did it for her daughter, but my sister-in-law did not fight at all. My brother did not care if she lived longer, so that is a big differnce between him and me becaue I did care.

If you're afraid to find out, I would say that's the reason it's weighing heavy on you, you're putting off seeking a resolution. So, of course, it's not done for you and you can't move on.

I know that is true, but I have to be psychologically prepared to face what I might find out. I know I will do it eventually, sooner than later, but I have nothing to move on to right now so it is okay to wait a little longer. It is not as if I will ever have any semblance of a life now that I am completely alone. I have no family left and no children and my only friends are on this forum. Right now I am only trying to prevent going into a depression since I have no hope for the future, if I think about it. The only thing I have left to live for are my eight cats and I would never kill myself and leave them behind.

 

[ChristineM]

Forgetting has served you well.

Sheesh, who said i forgot i suggest you reread my post and actually learn something rather than jumping to indoctrinated conclusions. Once again you show your ignorance of me. Expected of course.

 

[ChristineM]

My ideas aren’t stupid. I don’t know u but I know about forgiving someone who makes mistakes. I even know about forgiving someone who shows no remorse because I know something is not right within them.

Rape, terrorism and attempted murder are not mistakes.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I am not sure I follow...
Being unable to assess who is innocent doesn't entail that killing the guilty is abhorent. Only that we ought to refrain from killing.

Because death is final, while findings of guilt or innocent can change.

And in any case, as I've said, I am opposed to capital punishment in all cases. And for me, that is absolute.

 

[Koldo]

Because death is final, while findings of guilt or innocent can change.

And in any case, as I've said, I am opposed to capital punishment in all cases. And for me, that is absolute.

But then you are talking about a public policy...
I am talking about the killing itself.

Imagine someone is declared a murderer and has been killed by someone/State. There are two possibilities. Either he is a murderer, and I see no problem with him being killed, or he is not a murderer and killing him is abhorent.

You might say that since we can't be absolutely certain we shouldn't kill anyone (nor support capital punishment). I get that. However, that has no bearing on whether killing someone that is de facto a murderer is abhorent.

You can say still say that killing anyone, even a murderer, even if he really is a murderer, is abhorent. But that has nothing to do with us not being able to assess with absolutely certainty whether someone is a murderer.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

You can say still say that killing anyone, even a murderer, even if he really is a murderer, is abhorent. But that has nothing to do with us not being able to assess with absolutely certainty whether someone is a murderer.

And that is exactly what I did say.

 

[Trailblazer]

Because death is final, while findings of guilt or innocent can change.

And in any case, as I've said, I am opposed to capital punishment in all cases. And for me, that is absolute.

Findings of guilt or innocent 'can change' if more evidence is uncovered, but sometimes it is a known fact that the person is guilty, especially when they confess to the crime. Please tell me why you think in that case the person deserves to live out their life when they have taken a life or lives away from an innocent victim.

There is an episode of Forensic Files I have seen over and over because they keep repeating the shows and I watch the repeats. I never remember every detail but I remember the main points. This man killed his wife and buried her in the back yard and then he attempted to burn down the house and two of his three kids died in the fire. The father threatened the remaining child that if she ever told what she saw he would kill her. About 26 years later the surviving child came forward and told police that she had witnessed the burial which he later covered up by laying a cement slab over the burial site. To make a long story short, after she convinced the police that her story was true they dug up the burial site and found the wife's decomposed body. Of course, there was enough evidence for a conviction, but as I recall the man confessed to the murders in order to avoid the death sentence so he got life in prison without the possibility of parole.

I will never forget what the daughter said at the end of the show. She said that life in prison is 'nothing' compared to the punishment God will have for him, and she truly regretted that, indicating that she felt sorry for her father. I don't know how she could feel sorry for him, or why, but we are all different.

As an aside, I'm sure you know I believe in an afterlife. Baha'i Law allows for either the death penalty or life in prison as punishment for murder. If a person gets the death penalty we believe that there will be no 'second punishment' from God in the afterlife, but if a person gets life in prison there will be a second punishment from God in the afterlife. Thus I think that person is better off getting the death penalty.

 

[Koldo]

And that is exactly what I did say.

Why do you find the killing of a de facto murderer to be abhorent then? Any reason in particular?

 

[Jimmy]

Why do you find the killing of a de facto murderer to be abhorent then? Any reason in particular?

Something’s obviously wrong with them so why not show a little compassion

 

[Koldo]

Something’s obviously wrong with them so why not show a little compassion

Killing them is showing compassion, for there are fates much worse than death.
But even if you disagree, why would not showing compassion be abhorent when they haven't shown compassion themselves?

 

[Jimmy]

Killing them is showing compassion, for there are fates much worse than death.
But even if you disagree, why would not showing compassion be abhorent when they haven't shown compassion themselves?

Cuz we’re not them duh. Would if the person being executed doesn’t believe that there’s fates worse? 10 executions a year in the us. Those 10 are really necessary huh? Gimme a break. It’s just a way “tough” states puff their Old Testament chest.

 

[Koldo]

Cuz we’re not them duh.

And therefore?

Would if the person being executed doesn’t believe that there’s fates worse?

They would be wrong. Torturing someone until they beg to be killed and then killing them is much harsher than just killing them.

10 executions a year in the us. Those 10 are really necessary huh?

Who said anything about executions being necessary? Not I.

Gimme a break. It’s just a way “tough” states puff their Old Testament chest.

Irrelevant.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Findings of guilt or innocent 'can change' if more evidence is uncovered, but sometimes it is a known fact that the person is guilty, especially when they confess to the crime.

Killing them is showing compassion, for there are fates much worse than death.
But even if you disagree, why would not showing compassion be abhorent when they haven't shown compassion themselves?

A Canadian man by the name of Romeo Phillion falsely confessed to a murder in January, 1972 (the reasons for this are complex, but you can explore them here). He was not sentenced to death (Canada eventually outlawed that in 1998), but he was sentenced to life in prison. How would society have atoned if he had, in fact, been sentenced to death and executed? Issue a nice card saying "sorry about that?"

Other cases in Canada of people falsely convicted of murder include (just under the "Ms" Guy Paul Morin, David Milgaard, Donald Marshall. Others include Stephen Truscott (who was sentenced to be hanged at the ripe old age of 14! which must have been terrifying for a boy) and Thomas Sophanow. There have been others. Try looking up how many there have been in the U.S. You might be surprised. (Here's some help.)

All of these people, each and every one, suffered huge disruptions to their lives. Some were compensated afterwards, many were not. And some actually died at the hands of the state.

If you can assert that humans are capable of perfect knowledge that cannot in any possible way be in error, please show me the evidence. Otherwise, I tell you that we are not wise enough to take the life of anyone.

Finally, anyone who believes that "killing humans is wrong," and then makes excuses for doing just that, is behaving hypocritically, whether they think so or not.

 

[Koldo]

A Canadian man by the name of Romeo Phillion falsely confessed to a murder in January, 1972 (the reasons for this are complex, but you can explore them here). He was not sentenced to death (Canada eventually outlawed that in 1998), but he was sentenced to life in prison. How would society have atoned if he had, in fact, been sentenced to death and executed? Issue a nice card saying "sorry about that?"

Other cases in Canada of people falsely convicted of murder include (just under the "Ms" Guy Paul Morin, David Milgaard, Donald Marshall. Others include Stephen Truscott (who was sentenced to be hanged at the ripe old age of 14! which must have been terrifying for a boy) and Thomas Sophanow. There have been others. Try looking up how many there have been in the U.S. You might be surprised. (Here's some help.)

All of these people, each and every one, suffered huge disruptions to their lives. Some were compensated afterwards, many were not. And some actually died at the hands of the state.

If you can assert that humans are capable of perfect knowledge that cannot in any possible way be in error, please show me the evidence. Otherwise, I tell you that we are not wise enough to take the life of anyone.

I don't think it is possible to properly compensate anyone for wrongly sending them to jail for decades either. We have the duty to try, but we will necessarily fail. Do you think otherwise?

If you agree, then how can we ever send people to jail for decades since we are also prone to making mistakes on that regard every now and then?

Finally, anyone who believes that "killing humans is wrong," and then makes excuses for doing just that, is behaving hypocritically, whether they think so or not.

I don't believe that killing humans is always wrong, so I don't really have this sort of problem to deal with. (I am also mostly pro-choice, so there is that too.)

 

[Trailblazer]

A Canadian man by the name of Romeo Phillion falsely confessed to a murder in January, 1972 (the reasons for this are complex, but you can explore them here). He was not sentenced to death (Canada eventually outlawed that in 1998), but he was sentenced to life in prison. How would society have atoned if he had, in fact, been sentenced to death and executed? Issue a nice card saying "sorry about that?"

One has to ask why he falsely confessed to a murder. If he had been sentenced to death society would not need to atone for that because it would have been his own fault since he falsely confessed to a murder he did not commit.

If you can assert that humans are capable of perfect knowledge that cannot in any possible way be in error, please show me the evidence. Otherwise, I tell you that we are not wise enough to take the life of anyone.

There are cases where the person committed a murder without a doubt since there was forensic evidence that proved it, and then there are also confessions, but the death penalty is usually avoided when there is confession.

Finally, anyone who believes that "killing humans is wrong," and then makes excuses for doing just that, is behaving hypocritically, whether they think so or not.

There is no hypocrisy. Killing innocent humans is a crime. The death sentence is not killing innocent humans, it is justice for someone who killed innocent humans.

 

[Trailblazer]

I don't think it is possible to properly compensate anyone for wrongly sending them to jail for decades either. We have the duty to try, but we will necessarily fail. Do you think otherwise?

If you agree, then how can we ever send people to jail for decades since we are also prone to making mistakes on that regard every now and then?

Good point.

 

[viole]

Should one forgive? I say yes, otherwise they get eaten up with anger & bitterness.

It depends. If someone raped me, or killed my kids, then I would not forgive.
Anger and bitterness would not eat me up. On the contrary, they would feed me.

Ciao

- viole