Is the Death Penalty in America based on 'an eye for an eye , a tooth for a too

So that that would suggest that some of these convictions aren't 100% certain. In which cases those people shouldn't even be in prison never mind subejct to the death penalty. Surely under a justice system all those convicted are presumed to be equally guilty - i.e. they actually did it. If you don't trust the system enough to find everyone equally guilty how can you trust them to take someone's life on your behalf?

I understand the eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth premise is a jewish tenet that was set in the early history of the jews. That principle was originaly espoused by our founding fathers. However, as it often is in this world, it has been subverted into a political mess. Justice in this country is culturally, racially and economically biased. So many times has a man of color been lynched for "raping" their white wives or girlfriends. That's not an eye for and eye, nor was any jury present. And even when there was the jury was biased also. You have only to look at a jury to see that it was not 12 men and women that were the peers of the accused. The fact that many an accused prisoner cannot afford an attorney to represent them against an able and accomplished prosecutor shows the unfairness of the system.

What made me wonder about if separation of church and state or in other words ?separation of organized religion and civil authority,? should apply to the 'Death Penalty in America' is our American government has done away with anything that pertains to religion of any kind in all government funded schools , properties or any place 'owned' by government.

And if the Death Penalty was based or justified from a religious standing , from the bible, hence 'an eye for an eye etc...' shouldn't the government change their stance on it some way or other ?


The links from google show that the Death Penalty started a long time ago in other parts of the world long before modern America was 'discovered'.

And funny how some pro-choice people are against war because they don't want innocent people to be killed but want to give someone the right to kill their baby!

if you purposely take the life of another your life is forfeit
that is just

Maybe this isn't a good answer to your questions...but I just wanted to throw in my 2cents.....i'am a Christian....and still don't know everything that's written in the Bible....I try my best to understand the teachings of God's word....and my undying faith is Jesus Christ is my Lord and Savior....the only Son of God...i'am unclear as to what the Bible says about the death penalty....however, i'am 100% against it....I don't believe we have any right whatsoever to take another human life...FOR ANY REASON!!! Now, and I know this is a contridiction....but if I were in a postion where someone was trying to take my life or in self defence..or I came across someone attempting to kill another person...then I most likely would do what ever it took to stop it...even if it meant killing them....that is the ONLY way I believe in taking a life!!!

wait so the death penalty is justified in the USA because it appears in the bible to say "an eye for an eye"? is this so?

If so feel free to insert comment about Americans attention span as they never reached Jesus' opinion of an eye for an eye. Which is kind of important from a Christian perspective.

You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth". But I say to you, do not resist an evildoer. If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. (Matthew 5:38?39)

Im not really understanding what this thread is about

That's because your head is still in the bucket! Change your avvy, and let a little light in.....

she is asking if the death penalty in the USA is based on "an eye for an eye" but the death penalty has been around longer than christianty so i guess the answer is no, but seeing as the USA is relatively new apart from the native americans whom i dont think had a death penalty perhaps it could be????

I am really having a no brainer or something.

The state has no business meddling in the affairs of the church. Since the state is generally as corrupt & bent as hairpins why should they be allowed to corrupt religion? Its hard enough to keep morals & ethics as it is!!!