Anyone with proper reasoning will come to the conclusion that if it is evil to murder a human being...
Is this true? Do you mourn for people executed for capital crimes, jihadists killed fighting U.S. troops, or criminals killed in self-defense? Or are you bending your definition of "murder" to include deaths you personally dislike committed by people you dislike?
Helpful hint: "Murder" is a legal term. It has a specific set of elements which need to be satisfied by law for someone to be termed a murderer. Abortion is specifically excluded in these definitions nationwide and therefore is not murder.
If you want to use "murder" in a moral or theological context, then that's a mere personal opinion which nobody is obligated to believe and "proper reasoning" does not apply.
Good. That means we agree that the taking of human life isn't fundamentally evil and not everyone who takes the life of another is a murderer. Furthermore, we also agree that the taking of lives is in certain cases beneficial to the population as a whole.
Considering most mainstream churches oppose the execution of criminals, and we both support it, we should also be able to agree that religious doctrine shouldn't determine government laws.
I do not support the execution of criminals. That is the one theological based viewpoint that I have when it comes to politics. All the rest are philosophical. I also don’t believe that religious doctrine shouldn’t determine government laws and neither did the founding fathers. It can determine laws if that is what people agree to.
Close to agreement here, but mainstream interpretation of the first amendment and centuries of case law would prohibit a religious doctrine from becoming law based of the need to protect minority rights even if otherwise popular. If a secular law happens to coincide with religious doctrine and not violate the rights of non-believers, than I agree.
Is this true? Do you mourn for people executed for capital crimes, jihadists killed fighting U.S. troops, or criminals killed in self-defense? Or are you bending your definition of "murder" to include deaths you personally dislike committed by people you dislike?
Helpful hint: "Murder" is a legal term. It has a specific set of elements which need to be satisfied by law for someone to be termed a murderer. Abortion is specifically excluded in these definitions nationwide and therefore is not murder.
If you want to use "murder" in a moral or theological context, then that's a mere personal opinion which nobody is obligated to believe and "proper reasoning" does not apply.
When people are executed or killed in self defense it is not murder. So no I don’t mourn them.
Good. That means we agree that the taking of human life isn't fundamentally evil and not everyone who takes the life of another is a murderer. Furthermore, we also agree that the taking of lives is in certain cases beneficial to the population as a whole.
Considering most mainstream churches oppose the execution of criminals, and we both support it, we should also be able to agree that religious doctrine shouldn't determine government laws.
I do not support the execution of criminals. That is the one theological based viewpoint that I have when it comes to politics. All the rest are philosophical. I also don’t believe that religious doctrine shouldn’t determine government laws and neither did the founding fathers. It can determine laws if that is what people agree to.
Close to agreement here, but mainstream interpretation of the first amendment and centuries of case law would prohibit a religious doctrine from becoming law based of the need to protect minority rights even if otherwise popular. If a secular law happens to coincide with religious doctrine and not violate the rights of non-believers, than I agree.