More setting the record straight

HaloScan.com – Comments: “Yet, you tie tax cuts to the wealthy and the death penalty to the Gospel somehow, despite the fact that Jesus associated witht he poor and the executed. How does your words reflect the love of Christ?”

It’s not very often I find tax cuts and the death penalty in the same sentence, but I have no problem picking up the challenge of illustrating how these “reflect the love of Christ.”

Mr. Pete and I are not wealthy by any stretch of the imagination. We live in the inner city, drive old vehicles that Mr. Pete keeps on the road, do our own home repairs and improvements, our own laundry, meal preparation, cleaning homeschooling etc. etc. That said, we both still support the ideas of tax cuts because that stimulates the economy. When people have more money, they can spend more money at Mr. Pete’s business,and that’s good for my family. I’m not an economist by any means, but I understand that if the rich have money they spend it, and the goods and services that they spend their money on helps the people that provide the goods and services! I do not see how that doesn’t “reflect the love of Christ.” Jesus was, afterall, a carpenter. He had to sell his goods and services too!

The death penalty is even easier to connect. Jesus Christ, before he ascended, left us his church and the apostles with Peter as the leader, to lead and teach the people. We have leaders today via apostolic succession. One of the greatest gifts from one of the greatest leaders has been the Catechism of the Catholic church.

2267 Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.
If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.

Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm – without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself – the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity “are very rare, if not practically non-existent.”

I have never denied this. However, judging by the number of prison murders, I am not convinced that the state is “effective” enough in “preventing crime” to make the death penalty “non-existent.” It’s a worthy goal though.