Various Moral Issues
- Thread starter GWH
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Saying I disagree means I disagree that your ideas are better than what is currently done.
What am I misunderstanding about the work? 10 hours a day at a job. How are you going to monitor 100s or even a 1000 inmates in a variety of schedules? How many people would be needed to monitor?
And how am I misunderstanding the need to transport all of these people?
Also work release is not done from prisons, but work release centers made especially for those who Earned their ability to get a job. And if they are caught breaking any law or rule their privilege is immediately revoked and may even include more prison time.
At times even those with a good history within the prison and genuinely appreciate the opportunity for work release still ruin it sometimes.
My dad worked for years at a work release center. One of the inmates was close to finishing his sentence, something like a month away from going free. While at his job he walked by the liquor isle and lost control. He grabbed a bottle and started drinking. Had to go back to prison and his time there was extended.
This was a person that spent years of his time in prison showing himself to be changed and worked hard to prove it. Not to mention all the time he spent proving it by staying in the work release program.
Now if someone works that hard and has a genuine desire to reform can so suddenly throw it all away in a moment of weakness, what about someone who isn't at all wanting to reform? How easily would they reoffend?
As it stands now the risk of adding time to a sentence or risking going to solitary doesn't stop them. Why would it be any different under your plan? Where they get 10 hours a day out of prison and if they break a law they just get more time added to be out of the prison. Yet still have a place to sleep and be in a social environment when they aren't working.
I thought you said your plan eliminates death row? But you're still talking execution. And not just of murderers, but of any level of repeated criminality.
So the person that shoplifts repeatedly ends up getting punishment equal to someone who murders or rapes repeatedly?
How will people react to criminals being freed 10 hours a day? How will victims or family of victims feel about this?
Which brings up a new issue. How many angry family members will now have a free shot at the person that hurt their family? Some of them will try to attack the criminal right on open court in front of judged, police and a room full of witnesses. Now they'll have the opportunity to do the same, only this time they'll have weapons. Then you'll have shootings in public places by anger filled people with one goal in mind. And may not be trained well enough to use a gun properly, or so red with anger they just snap.
Undoubtedly this will lead to innocent people getting injured or killed. How would you prevent that?
And how might that negatively affect the employers business?
Ultimately it opens up the door to more violence by people who may not otherwise be violent. As well as risking more innocent lives and potentially ruining a business.
Let's say the value of a human life is to be at a million dollars, which seems plenty fair. Now the person who murdered has a debt so substantial he'll never pay it off, especially at a minimal paying job. What then is there to prevent him from giving up? Just running off one day and go into hiding, and back to crime.
How about old people who can't work 10 hours a day 6 days a week? How will they be handled? Or people with disabilities or illness?
Counseling only works for those that Want it. Forcing people to go to counseling rarely, if ever, works. Not to mention the cost of hiring enough counselors to ensure there are enough for everybody.
I mean the costs alone with needing to hire so many more people in a field that's already underfunded and under staffed,is enough to ruin the feasibility. Not to mention the costs to the employers.
You've not addressed how these costs, by either affected, will be handled. Nor the inability to fully staff prisons as it is.
Or the potential variances in pay among different areas and how that will equal out so no one has to work longer than another with the same charge.
You've not addressed how to stop them from communicating with people at work, or the inevitable flood of drugs and other paraphernalia that will fly into the prisons as a result.
You said "a person who has paid his debt should not be labeled for life", and when I questioned you on that your response was something about making them aware of the new rules.
Again, I could go on but with everything I've laid out amongst my posts, they've already overwhelming shown that your model, while well intended, is ineffective.
Do I think the current system is ideal at the moment? No. But at least it's helping keep more criminals from roaming free.
Some are looking to prisons in other countries that have more success in reforming their inmates, and wanting to consider making changes in the current system to those that are more successful.
Somehow changes do need to be made to the prison system to make it more effective. Part of that is how the prisoners are treated and the approaches taken to reform them. The other part is on the prisons, and their employees. Mistreatment of prisoners by guards is wide spread. This only turns the prisoners more against the prison and their willingness to follow rules. And increases the risks of violence in the prison.
So accountability needs to be increased for the guards as well, not just the inmates.
Guards who are fair and friendly with the prisoners are more well respected, and thus more likely to be obeyed. Not to mention the prisoners may even provide them protection.
What am I misunderstanding about the work? 10 hours a day at a job. How are you going to monitor 100s or even a 1000 inmates in a variety of schedules? How many people would be needed to monitor?
And how am I misunderstanding the need to transport all of these people?
Also work release is not done from prisons, but work release centers made especially for those who Earned their ability to get a job. And if they are caught breaking any law or rule their privilege is immediately revoked and may even include more prison time.
At times even those with a good history within the prison and genuinely appreciate the opportunity for work release still ruin it sometimes.
My dad worked for years at a work release center. One of the inmates was close to finishing his sentence, something like a month away from going free. While at his job he walked by the liquor isle and lost control. He grabbed a bottle and started drinking. Had to go back to prison and his time there was extended.
This was a person that spent years of his time in prison showing himself to be changed and worked hard to prove it. Not to mention all the time he spent proving it by staying in the work release program.
Now if someone works that hard and has a genuine desire to reform can so suddenly throw it all away in a moment of weakness, what about someone who isn't at all wanting to reform? How easily would they reoffend?
As it stands now the risk of adding time to a sentence or risking going to solitary doesn't stop them. Why would it be any different under your plan? Where they get 10 hours a day out of prison and if they break a law they just get more time added to be out of the prison. Yet still have a place to sleep and be in a social environment when they aren't working.
I thought you said your plan eliminates death row? But you're still talking execution. And not just of murderers, but of any level of repeated criminality.
So the person that shoplifts repeatedly ends up getting punishment equal to someone who murders or rapes repeatedly?
How will people react to criminals being freed 10 hours a day? How will victims or family of victims feel about this?
Which brings up a new issue. How many angry family members will now have a free shot at the person that hurt their family? Some of them will try to attack the criminal right on open court in front of judged, police and a room full of witnesses. Now they'll have the opportunity to do the same, only this time they'll have weapons. Then you'll have shootings in public places by anger filled people with one goal in mind. And may not be trained well enough to use a gun properly, or so red with anger they just snap.
Undoubtedly this will lead to innocent people getting injured or killed. How would you prevent that?
And how might that negatively affect the employers business?
Ultimately it opens up the door to more violence by people who may not otherwise be violent. As well as risking more innocent lives and potentially ruining a business.
Let's say the value of a human life is to be at a million dollars, which seems plenty fair. Now the person who murdered has a debt so substantial he'll never pay it off, especially at a minimal paying job. What then is there to prevent him from giving up? Just running off one day and go into hiding, and back to crime.
How about old people who can't work 10 hours a day 6 days a week? How will they be handled? Or people with disabilities or illness?
Counseling only works for those that Want it. Forcing people to go to counseling rarely, if ever, works. Not to mention the cost of hiring enough counselors to ensure there are enough for everybody.
I mean the costs alone with needing to hire so many more people in a field that's already underfunded and under staffed,is enough to ruin the feasibility. Not to mention the costs to the employers.
You've not addressed how these costs, by either affected, will be handled. Nor the inability to fully staff prisons as it is.
Or the potential variances in pay among different areas and how that will equal out so no one has to work longer than another with the same charge.
You've not addressed how to stop them from communicating with people at work, or the inevitable flood of drugs and other paraphernalia that will fly into the prisons as a result.
You said "a person who has paid his debt should not be labeled for life", and when I questioned you on that your response was something about making them aware of the new rules.
Again, I could go on but with everything I've laid out amongst my posts, they've already overwhelming shown that your model, while well intended, is ineffective.
Do I think the current system is ideal at the moment? No. But at least it's helping keep more criminals from roaming free.
Some are looking to prisons in other countries that have more success in reforming their inmates, and wanting to consider making changes in the current system to those that are more successful.
Somehow changes do need to be made to the prison system to make it more effective. Part of that is how the prisoners are treated and the approaches taken to reform them. The other part is on the prisons, and their employees. Mistreatment of prisoners by guards is wide spread. This only turns the prisoners more against the prison and their willingness to follow rules. And increases the risks of violence in the prison.
So accountability needs to be increased for the guards as well, not just the inmates.
Guards who are fair and friendly with the prisoners are more well respected, and thus more likely to be obeyed. Not to mention the prisoners may even provide them protection.
-
1
- Show all
I am sorry I said "I guess this is a form of work release", because you have misunderstood the plan ever since, so PLEASE take "release" out of the discussion!
Re your saying: "As it stands now the risk of adding time to a sentence or risking going to solitary doesn't stop them. Why would it be any different under your plan?" Because adding time eventually will subtract them for all time.
Re "I thought you said your plan eliminates death row? But you're still talking execution. And not just of murderers, but of any level of repeated criminality." Correct, with no waiting on death row. Recidivism warrants elimination at some point.
Re "So the person that shoplifts repeatedly ends up getting punishment equal to someone who murders or rapes repeatedly?" Under this plan, there are few opportunities for repeating any crime.
Re "Let's say the value of a human life is to be at a million dollars, which seems plenty fair. Now the person who murdered has a debt so substantial he'll never pay it off, especially at a minimal paying job. What then is there to prevent him from giving up? Just running off one day and go into hiding, and back to crime." I appreciate your critique, but I would appreciate more you being constructive and suggesting solutions to the objections you state. This is why I stated that "the assessed restitution would be minimal on the assumption that the prisoner would reform" IOW, the penalty for first offenders including the elderly and disabled should be low enough to allow them to pay it off and reform in a reasonable/appropriate length of time.
Re "Counseling only works for those that Want it. Forcing people to go to counseling rarely, if ever, works. Not to mention the cost of hiring enough counselors to ensure there are enough for everybody." I think society should be able to have counselors on prison staff who would provide what is called "Brief Therapy", and if it does not work, at least we tried, which is more than we are doing now. And the finality of the penalty for recidivism will reduce the cost considerably.
Re the drug problem: Those who are caught and convicted will receive their just consequence.
Re "I could go on but with everything I've laid out amongst my posts, they've already overwhelming shown that your model, while well intended, is ineffective." Not at all, because you have misunderstood too much.
Re "Do I think the current system is ideal at the moment? No. But at least it's helping keep more criminals from roaming free.": I agree, and the system I propose would greatly reduce that number.
Re "Somehow changes do need to be made to the prison system to make it more effective. Part of that is how the prisoners are treated and the approaches taken to reform them. The other part is on the prisons, and their employees. Mistreatment of prisoners by guards is wide spread. This only turns the prisoners more against the prison and their willingness to follow rules. And increases the risks of violence in the prison. So accountability needs to be increased for the guards as well, not just the inmates.": Amen to all of that, but please help us figure out the "somehow". Thanks for your input.
Re your saying: "As it stands now the risk of adding time to a sentence or risking going to solitary doesn't stop them. Why would it be any different under your plan?" Because adding time eventually will subtract them for all time.
Re "I thought you said your plan eliminates death row? But you're still talking execution. And not just of murderers, but of any level of repeated criminality." Correct, with no waiting on death row. Recidivism warrants elimination at some point.
Re "So the person that shoplifts repeatedly ends up getting punishment equal to someone who murders or rapes repeatedly?" Under this plan, there are few opportunities for repeating any crime.
Re "Let's say the value of a human life is to be at a million dollars, which seems plenty fair. Now the person who murdered has a debt so substantial he'll never pay it off, especially at a minimal paying job. What then is there to prevent him from giving up? Just running off one day and go into hiding, and back to crime." I appreciate your critique, but I would appreciate more you being constructive and suggesting solutions to the objections you state. This is why I stated that "the assessed restitution would be minimal on the assumption that the prisoner would reform" IOW, the penalty for first offenders including the elderly and disabled should be low enough to allow them to pay it off and reform in a reasonable/appropriate length of time.
Re "Counseling only works for those that Want it. Forcing people to go to counseling rarely, if ever, works. Not to mention the cost of hiring enough counselors to ensure there are enough for everybody." I think society should be able to have counselors on prison staff who would provide what is called "Brief Therapy", and if it does not work, at least we tried, which is more than we are doing now. And the finality of the penalty for recidivism will reduce the cost considerably.
Re the drug problem: Those who are caught and convicted will receive their just consequence.
Re "I could go on but with everything I've laid out amongst my posts, they've already overwhelming shown that your model, while well intended, is ineffective." Not at all, because you have misunderstood too much.
Re "Do I think the current system is ideal at the moment? No. But at least it's helping keep more criminals from roaming free.": I agree, and the system I propose would greatly reduce that number.
Re "Somehow changes do need to be made to the prison system to make it more effective. Part of that is how the prisoners are treated and the approaches taken to reform them. The other part is on the prisons, and their employees. Mistreatment of prisoners by guards is wide spread. This only turns the prisoners more against the prison and their willingness to follow rules. And increases the risks of violence in the prison. So accountability needs to be increased for the guards as well, not just the inmates.": Amen to all of that, but please help us figure out the "somehow". Thanks for your input.
Okay then, as the herder of you cats I think it is time to summarize the numerous topics that have been introduced:
Abortion on Tue. 10-22 at 5:46a.m.
Biomedical Ethics on 10-22 at 8:44a.m., especially Transgendering
Criminal Justice on 10-22 at 2:29p.m.
Euthanasia on 10-22 at 3:43p.m., especially regarding cats
A for Aliens = U for UFOs on Thur. 10-24 at 9:45a.m.
D for Drinking on 10-24 at 2:13p.m., also Drug Use/Abuse, esp. Marijuana
Murder and Rape were introduced tangentially on Fri. 10-25 at 12:12p.m.
Feel free to elaborate on what has been introduced, but now I will introduce an E topic: Economic Assistance by saying that Jesus once stated that “the poor you will always have with you” (MT 26:11). However, He also taught us to “give to the poor” (MT 19:21). These verses suggest that we should do our best to alleviate, if not completely eliminate, the problems related to poverty. How is a good way that may be part of the best way to do this?
Abortion on Tue. 10-22 at 5:46a.m.
Biomedical Ethics on 10-22 at 8:44a.m., especially Transgendering
Criminal Justice on 10-22 at 2:29p.m.
Euthanasia on 10-22 at 3:43p.m., especially regarding cats
A for Aliens = U for UFOs on Thur. 10-24 at 9:45a.m.
D for Drinking on 10-24 at 2:13p.m., also Drug Use/Abuse, esp. Marijuana
Murder and Rape were introduced tangentially on Fri. 10-25 at 12:12p.m.
Feel free to elaborate on what has been introduced, but now I will introduce an E topic: Economic Assistance by saying that Jesus once stated that “the poor you will always have with you” (MT 26:11). However, He also taught us to “give to the poor” (MT 19:21). These verses suggest that we should do our best to alleviate, if not completely eliminate, the problems related to poverty. How is a good way that may be part of the best way to do this?
Wait, we have to link it with politics? That goes beyond the original purview.
I kind of thought the tenth commandment would be scripture enough, but I guess there's also the proverb about putting money into bags with holes...
I was kind of hoping you would have something on it. I have heard many preachers talk about many things, but they never, ever, ever talk about the tenth commandment. Reckon why is that?
I kind of thought the tenth commandment would be scripture enough, but I guess there's also the proverb about putting money into bags with holes...
I was kind of hoping you would have something on it. I have heard many preachers talk about many things, but they never, ever, ever talk about the tenth commandment. Reckon why is that?
-
1
- Show all
Groovy
They took the God out of everything and look what's happened we got Obama and then Biden.
God's not happy with the world. There's more sin now then theres ever been, even in the times of Sodom and Gomorrah.
Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one gets the prize? Run in such a way as to get the prize. 25 Everyone who competes in the games goes into strict training. They do it to get a crown that will not last, but we do it to get a crown that will last forever.
They took the God out of everything and look what's happened we got Obama and then Biden.
God's not happy with the world. There's more sin now then theres ever been, even in the times of Sodom and Gomorrah.
Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one gets the prize? Run in such a way as to get the prize. 25 Everyone who competes in the games goes into strict training. They do it to get a crown that will not last, but we do it to get a crown that will last forever.
-
1
- Show all
Jesus once stated that “the poor you will always have with you” (MT 26:11). However, He also taught us to “give to the poor” (MT 19:21). These verses suggest that we should do our best to alleviate, if not completely eliminate, the problems related to poverty. We know that “You shall not steal” (EX 20:15) is the eighth of the Ten Commandments (TOJ #110).
The apostle Paul synthesized these two commands in Ephesians 4:28, saying: “He who has been stealing must steal no longer, but must work, doing something useful with his own hands, that he may have something to share with those in need.” Another command (in 2THS 3:10) states: “If a man will not work, he shall not eat.”
Paul also states (in 1TM 5:8): “If anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for his immediate family, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.” And again, he wrote: “Our desire is not that others might be relieved while you are hard pressed, but that there might be equality.” (2CR 8:13) Equality does not require uniformity or conformity or a communist system, which often has resulted in a smaller pie to share, but rather that every person should have an equal opportunity to earn a living. Sewing these verses together with spiritual thread, we can discern that the will of God is for people who are able to work to seek employment, so that earning a fair wage will provide at least the basic necessities plus something (a tithe or tenth per Malachi 3:8-10) left over for charity.
Full employment at a livable wage is a wonderful goal; the problem is how to achieve it. On one side of the debate are those who seem to believe that government can solve the problem of poverty by giving people welfare in one form or another. On the other side of the issue are those who stress that every able-bodied adult should work and support themselves without charity (sometimes called workfare). The “welfarists” criticize the “workfarists” for an apparent lack of sympathy for the poor, while the “workfarists” say the “welfarists” create permanent dependency by the poor. The area of agreement by both sides surely includes the fact that people sometimes experience financial misfortunes beyond their control and need help. Perhaps most people would agree that the need for help often exceeds the capabilities of many families and private agencies, so there is a need for government to do something, but what policies should we Christian voters support to encourage industry and discourage laziness?
The apostle Paul synthesized these two commands in Ephesians 4:28, saying: “He who has been stealing must steal no longer, but must work, doing something useful with his own hands, that he may have something to share with those in need.” Another command (in 2THS 3:10) states: “If a man will not work, he shall not eat.”
Paul also states (in 1TM 5:8): “If anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for his immediate family, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.” And again, he wrote: “Our desire is not that others might be relieved while you are hard pressed, but that there might be equality.” (2CR 8:13) Equality does not require uniformity or conformity or a communist system, which often has resulted in a smaller pie to share, but rather that every person should have an equal opportunity to earn a living. Sewing these verses together with spiritual thread, we can discern that the will of God is for people who are able to work to seek employment, so that earning a fair wage will provide at least the basic necessities plus something (a tithe or tenth per Malachi 3:8-10) left over for charity.
Full employment at a livable wage is a wonderful goal; the problem is how to achieve it. On one side of the debate are those who seem to believe that government can solve the problem of poverty by giving people welfare in one form or another. On the other side of the issue are those who stress that every able-bodied adult should work and support themselves without charity (sometimes called workfare). The “welfarists” criticize the “workfarists” for an apparent lack of sympathy for the poor, while the “workfarists” say the “welfarists” create permanent dependency by the poor. The area of agreement by both sides surely includes the fact that people sometimes experience financial misfortunes beyond their control and need help. Perhaps most people would agree that the need for help often exceeds the capabilities of many families and private agencies, so there is a need for government to do something, but what policies should we Christian voters support to encourage industry and discourage laziness?
-
1
-
1
- Show all
I have an idea about that. God did such an amazing job creating all the amazing animals, so many beautiful creations. Those who do not credit God with this creation, are yet still unable to resist its enchantment, and worship the creation instead of the Creator. Not realizing that every living creature is simply food for every other living creature. God did such an awesome job setting the table, the Godless can't wrap their minds around the fact that its all just food, beautiful, flying, creeping, crawling, frolicking food.
-
1
- Show all
I wasn't attempting to start some new doctrine. Simply stating my thoughts on the subject. I absolutely appreciate the beauty of Gods creation. I kind of think that was the point. But yes, I love dogs and cats, cats not as much, and flowers etc. But if I'm starving, you could be a Westminster Blue Ribbon Queensland Heeler, but you're going into a pot, just saying.