I
am not commenting on this article because I am defending the criminal himself
in this case rather the U.S. Constitution.
However,
after discussing this article and some of the comments with a colleague I have
to admit that he made an interesting point.
Observing not just the comments on the article, he noted that for a
society that claims to be based on the Christian faith, there are a great many that
also appear to support retributive justice.
Further into the discussion on the subject he compared this to the way
certain Christians have a habit of pulling specific passages from the Bible in
order to make a point. The same can be
said for those who pull specific sections of the U.S. Constitution in order to
defend specific actions.
The
Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads: “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor
excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted”
Regardless
of the crimes committed, criminals have been brought before a court of
law. They have been tried, convicted by
a jury and sentenced in accordance with that finding. As a society we don’t necessarily have to
approve of the results of that process, our entire social structure on the values
laid out in that document.
A
fact that I did find very interesting as I proceeded to continue reading
various comments on this particular article.
While an individual using the pseudo name of ‘Blue Knight’ seems to
think that what has happened in this case is ‘justified simply because this man
was a convicted criminal’ which is completely absurd in my opinion.
In
one post Blue Knight stated simply [quote] The bible states ‘tooth for a tooth’
& ‘eye for an eye’ [end quote]
I
believe this is what my colleague was speaking of during our conversation about
some of the comments on this article when he stated that certain Christians
have a habit of pulling specific passages from the Bible in order to make a
point.
The
entire scripture reads: “Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye
for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But
I say unto you, that ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smith thee on thy
right cheek, to him the other also” Matthew 5:38-39
And
for further reading:
"Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto
wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the
Lord. Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink:
for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. Be not overcome of
evil, but overcome evil with good." Romans 12:19-21
As
I continued to read additional comments, curiously enough the Biblical logic
continues with this comment from Jason McMahon:
[quote] – Psalm 137:9 “Happy
shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.” Thats the bible telling you its fun to stone
your child...cant really trust every passage in the bible. [end quote]
My response to this was simple:
Interesting. That particular passage [Psalm 137:9] is in
reality the writer speaking of the vengeance the Lord will take upon the Babylonians. The terminology is symbolic, not
literal. The entire 137th
Psalm is a song of lament that was written during the time period that the
Hebrews were held captive by the Babylonians from about 586 to 538 B.C.
I will continue to follow this
article.
About Skin
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe original entry was deleted due issues with the length of the post.
ReplyDeleteReviewing the Huffington Post article again, I discovered that ‘Madameruby63’ commented on my post. [quote] Thank you Valerie - I love the Bible! I feel so much better knowing it's all in God's hands! [unquote]
I do sincerely appreciate the back and forth commentary here on the Huffington Post for a variety of reasons, none of which are the belief or expectation that there will always be agreement. Contrary to that fact I enjoy learning new things through the public discourse provided on the various topics that arise from the articles contained herein. This is also why I always make a concerted effort to respond to those who respond to me, regardless of their viewpoint. My intention is simply an attempt to clarify my position rather than to justify it.
Which is why I made the following reply to MadameRuby63:
You’re welcome. I read a lot of articles on the Huffington Post, to include as many comments as I can before I post. While I myself do not profess to be a Christian but rather a Theologist, I was appalled at what I felt was the complete disregard for human life that was displayed in the comments made by Blue Knight. I personally would not have allowed something like this to happen to an animal much less a human being.
As a rape survivor and a victim of a domestic violence altercation that has left me permanently disabled, I view cases like this in a different light. The anger never truly passes from you, it is only diluted with the understanding that there is absolutely nothing that will change the fact that it happened. You can let it rule your life or you can move on, those are your only choices.
For those interested in further opinion on this comment, please feel free to visit my Tripod Blog. Highlight the link below, right click and choose ‘open in another window’ so you can return to your current page.
http://vjbuchanan.tripod.com/BlogCommentary/index.blog?topic_id=1127333