Make these ads go away.
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14

Thread: Is an eye for an eye a good standard of justice?

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    1,039
    Local Date
    02-19-2020
    Local Time
    11:36 PM

    Is an eye for an eye a good standard of justice?

    Is an eye for an eye a good standard of justice?

    God does not seem to think so.

    Our standard of justice as shown in the scriptures and in most governments is based on an eye for an eye where the penalty has a relationship to the severity of the offence.

    God does not go by this standard.

    In his eyes, all sins are the same, in terms of the penalty God planned and will be punished eternally and in the same way.

    Is Godís eternal punishment for all sinners, great or small, good justice?
    If so, should we scrap an eye for an eye and have the same punishment for all crimes and sins?
    Should we follow Godís lead instead of going against it in secular justice?

    Is an eye for an eye good justice?

    If you think so, please speculate on Godís overkill in terms of punishment.

    Regards
    DL

  2. #2
    Premium Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    6,252
    Local Date
    02-20-2020
    Local Time
    05:36 PM

    Re: Is an eye for an eye a good standard of justice?

    As it's understood today, it's wrong. If you read the whole chapter and not just he verse you'll find it has nothing to do with 'taking out' someone because someone else did the same.

    the chapter and that particular verse means that all are equal. The rich man and slave both.You'll find in todays' world the rich man can do what ever he wants to the poor without recompense.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    1,039
    Local Date
    02-19-2020
    Local Time
    11:36 PM

    Re: Is an eye for an eye a good standard of justice?

    Quote Originally Posted by fuzzywuzzy View Post
    As it's understood today, it's wrong. If you read the whole chapter and not just he verse you'll find it has nothing to do with 'taking out' someone because someone else did the same.

    the chapter and that particular verse means that all are equal. The rich man and slave both.You'll find in todays' world the rich man can do what ever he wants to the poor without recompense.
    Sometimes but mostly not. Do not believe garbage.

    Your first is correct.

    So are you saying we should demand more or less than an eye for an eye?

    If less, how much less (or loss ), should the victim give up to the perpetrator?

    Reciprocity is fair play. Why penalize the victim yet again?

    Regards
    DL

  4. #4
    Senior Member FourPart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Southampton
    Posts
    6,285
    Local Date
    02-20-2020
    Local Time
    07:36 AM

    Re: Is an eye for an eye a good standard of justice?

    It raises the matter of Capital Punishment. It's a controversial subject. It always has been & always will be, and the same arguments will always apply.

    Pros:
    The ultimate deterrent.
    Closure for the victim's & their families.
    Won't do it again.

    Cons:
    Not really a deterrent. If it was there wouldn't have been so many hangings when we still had it.
    Is it really closure - to see the perpetrator escape the remaining years of his life locked in a cell to contemplate the error of his ways?
    Won't do it again. Can't argue with that, but what if it's later found that he was innocent all along?

    Whether you are for or against the use of Capital Punishment these will always be questions that can never be resolved.

    On a much lighter scale, however, I am very much in favour of Corporal Punishment. A clip round the ear, or a caning for misbehaving at school never did anyone any harm. These days we are bound by the EU 'Human Rights' regulations that forbids even the parents to raise a hand against their progeny & as a result, kids being what they are will continue to push the boundaries. Nipping it in the bud & laying down the boundaries before it goes to far is best for all concerned.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    1,039
    Local Date
    02-19-2020
    Local Time
    11:36 PM

    Re: Is an eye for an eye a good standard of justice?

    You seem to be indicating that an eye for an eye is overkill.

    I agree as that does not give any blame to society at large and they are the ones who created or helped create the perpetrator.

    But if equal reciprocity is overkill, how much mercy should be shown?

    If I steal $1,000.00, is giving it all back and then getting some further penalty still overkill?

    Do you see what I mean about society sharing blame?

    Regards
    DL

  6. #6
    Senior Member High Threshold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2,854
    Local Date
    02-20-2020
    Local Time
    08:36 AM

    Re: Is an eye for an eye a good standard of justice?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gnostic Christian Bishop View Post
    Is an eye for an eye a good standard of justice?
    Absolutely not. That would leave a cyclops at an unfair disadvantage.

  7. #7
    Proudly humble LarsMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    usually on the road to somewhere.
    Posts
    11,177
    Local Date
    02-20-2020
    Local Time
    12:36 AM

    Re: Is an eye for an eye a good standard of justice?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gnostic Christian Bishop View Post
    You seem to be indicating that an eye for an eye is overkill.

    I agree as that does not give any blame to society at large and they are the ones who created or helped create the perpetrator.

    But if equal reciprocity is overkill, how much mercy should be shown?

    If I steal $1,000.00, is giving it all back and then getting some further penalty still overkill?

    Do you see what I mean about society sharing blame?

    Regards
    DL
    An eye for an eye is a simplification of a concept.
    But it is hardly overkill. If you cost me an eye, should it not be on you to pay a price similar to mine? Perhaps loosing your own eye might be a bit harsh in today's world, but the punishment should suit the crime.
    In your example of stealing $1000, giving it back to me is not a penalty. That is the minimum required. That means only that you are out the money that is rightfully mine. Now, how shall you pay for the harm you caused me? At the minimum, then you should have to pay me back for any inconveniences you caused me. Like the late fee I incurred because I could not make my car payment in time. and the reconnection fee because my telephone was disconnected. And that is still just setting things right for me.
    Now you should face some costs to teach you that stealing my money is not acceptable behavior. Perhaps being locked up in jail for a time? but, of course, the old ways? how about losing a hand because you are a thief? Maybe too extreme? In England in the 18th century, they packed folks off to the colonies because they were thieves or some other types of scoundrels. There's a thought.

    Blaming society. Now their is a novel approach. Sure, it's all the fault of society that you have no moral concepts.
    Hogwash.
    Lots of folks grew up in a less than ideal society. In fact, most of us. We didn't all turn out to be thieves and murderers, though. Something else must be the cause. AH! the parents. There you go. So when you steal from me, the constable can hunt down your father and mother and cane them, because you turned out so rotten. How does THAT sound. Let's blame the parents.

    I think that the old hunter-gather societies had the right idea.
    If you stole from tribe members, you were publicly called out and humiliated. Perhaps even sent out of the tribe. Forced to get along on your own for a while. Maybe allowed back in after you had time to think about it.

    The biblical eye for an eye that God suggested was really not meant to be taken literally, by the way. The Israelites were a communal organization. It was bad enough for the community to lose one guy's contribution when he lost an eye, or a foot. It really made no sense to make two cripples.

    None of that stuff was God's ideal.
    ‚ÄúThe reality we can put into words is never reality itself.‚ÄĚ
    ‚Äē Werner Heisenberg
    "The trouble with people isn't that they don't know, but that they know so much that ain't so."
    - Will Rogers
    "Truth isn't Truth"
    - Rudy Giuliani

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    1,039
    Local Date
    02-19-2020
    Local Time
    11:36 PM

    Re: Is an eye for an eye a good standard of justice?

    Quote Originally Posted by High Threshold View Post
    Absolutely not. That would leave a cyclops at an unfair disadvantage.
    If an eye for an eye is overkill, by how much is it overkill?

    For instance, if I steal $100,00 form you, what should be my punishment?

    Reciprocity would have me paying back the $100.00, --- but would you not add some other punishment that goes past just restitution?

    Regards
    DL

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    1,039
    Local Date
    02-19-2020
    Local Time
    11:36 PM

    Re: Is an eye for an eye a good standard of justice?

    Quote Originally Posted by LarsMac View Post
    An eye for an eye is a simplification of a concept.
    But it is hardly overkill. If you cost me an eye, should it not be on you to pay a price similar to mine? Perhaps loosing your own eye might be a bit harsh in today's world, but the punishment should suit the crime.
    In your example of stealing $1000, giving it back to me is not a penalty. That is the minimum required. That means only that you are out the money that is rightfully mine. Now, how shall you pay for the harm you caused me? At the minimum, then you should have to pay me back for any inconveniences you caused me. Like the late fee I incurred because I could not make my car payment in time. and the reconnection fee because my telephone was disconnected. And that is still just setting things right for me.
    Now you should face some costs to teach you that stealing my money is not acceptable behavior. Perhaps being locked up in jail for a time? but, of course, the old ways? how about losing a hand because you are a thief? Maybe too extreme? In England in the 18th century, they packed folks off to the colonies because they were thieves or some other types of scoundrels. There's a thought.

    Blaming society. Now their is a novel approach. Sure, it's all the fault of society that you have no moral concepts.
    Hogwash.
    Lots of folks grew up in a less than ideal society. In fact, most of us. We didn't all turn out to be thieves and murderers, though. Something else must be the cause. AH! the parents. There you go. So when you steal from me, the constable can hunt down your father and mother and cane them, because you turned out so rotten. How does THAT sound. Let's blame the parents.

    I think that the old hunter-gather societies had the right idea.
    If you stole from tribe members, you were publicly called out and humiliated. Perhaps even sent out of the tribe. Forced to get along on your own for a while. Maybe allowed back in after you had time to think about it.

    The biblical eye for an eye that God suggested was really not meant to be taken literally, by the way. The Israelites were a communal organization. It was bad enough for the community to lose one guy's contribution when he lost an eye, or a foot. It really made no sense to make two cripples.

    None of that stuff was God's ideal.
    So you do not think society at large contributes to making criminals criminals then?

    They are just born that way. Right?

    Regards
    DL

  10. #10
    Senior Member High Threshold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2,854
    Local Date
    02-20-2020
    Local Time
    08:36 AM

    Re: Is an eye for an eye a good standard of justice?

    Register to remove this ad.
    Quote Originally Posted by Gnostic Christian Bishop View Post
    Is an eye for an eye a good standard of justice?
    Quote Originally Posted by High Threshold View Post
    Absolutely not. That would leave a cyclops at an unfair disadvantage.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gnostic Christian Bishop View Post
    If an eye for an eye is overkill, by how much is it overkill?

    For instance, if I steal $100,00 form you, what should be my punishment?

    Regards
    DL
    If a cyclops took one of your eyes that would be like stealing $100,00 from you. But if you were to take one of his eyes in return that would like taking ALL OF HIS MONEY, even if it's a few gazillion ................. or more.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts