Today, November 13, 2007, I read in the Spokesman Review, that Joseph Duncan’s attorneys filed legal arguments saying the death penalty is clearly arbitrary and unfair. It is reported that federal prosecutors have complained in court that one of Duncan’s attorneys, capital punishment specialist Mark Larranaga is on a “crusade” against the death penalty rather than specifically seeking to represent Duncan.

The article reports, “Duncan has admitted to killing three members of the Groene family in a bloody attack in 2004 at their home hear Coeur d’Alene, before he allegedly kidnapped to young children from the family for sex and killed one, a 9-year-old boy.” What the article doesn’t say is that the surviving child, who was 8 years old at the time, Shasta Groene, witnessed her mother, teen brother, and mother’s boyfriend being beaten to death. Then she endured sexual abuse (over a period of weeks) and probably had to watch her 9-year-old brother also be sexually abused and then killed and burned up in a campfire.

It’s obvious that Duncan’s attorneys have given no thought to the surviving victim and the victims’ family, not to mention the many of us who wept, hoped, and prayed that the two children would be found alive. I don’t know Shasta Groene, but my heart broke for that young girl and her living relatives, and the four lives that were put to an abrupt end before it was time.

Some of the arguments:


The punishment should fit the crime. Duncan murdered four people and tortured two children. No, we should not torture him like he tortured those five people. But why should they die and we let him live? Capital punishment fits the crime of murder to the fourth power. He arbitrarily inflicted his own will onto five people to satisfy his perverse sexual appetite for innocent children. Personally, it wouldn’t bother me if we made it as humane as possible by giving him a general anesthesia before lethal injection. That way, he most probably wouldn’t feel a thing, but simply go to sleep and never wake up. There is no torture in that, and nothing cruel. It’s a bit unusual, but only in the sense that it makes the death as comfortable as possible for the perpetrator who bludgeoned to death four innocent people and repeatedly raped two small children.


There’s a reason for that. There’s rarely an immediate consequence for someone on death row. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_row “Due to the lengthy, expensive and time consuming appeals procedure that must be followed in the United States before an execution can be carried out, prisoners may wait years before execution; nearly a quarter of deaths on Death Row in the U.S. are in fact of natural causes.” We are, in a sense, saying, “There are no real immediate consequences for your actions, no matter how heinous. The worst that can happen to you is being placed in prison while the powers that be try to figure out what to do with you. And don’t worry – there are plenty of lawyers like Mark Larranaga fighting for your right to rape and murder without severe penalty. So, dream up your most wicked fantasy and have the time of your life, because even if your buddy Mark loses his battle for you, you’ll still likely die of natural causes on death row. You just need to decide if it’s worth it.” If anything needs reform, it’s the United States appeals procedure.


Many of these cases were overturned because someone had originally withheld evidence. There should be severe penalties for anyone who withholds evidence or perjurers themselves. It should be severe enough that if they’re found out the result is painful, like losing law license, job, and serving jail time and restitution payable to the person whose life they destroyed, or if too late, the family of the deceased. In fact, if someone is put to death because someone withheld evidence or perjured themselves, that person(s) should be tried for, at the very least, manslaughter.

Many of these cases were overturned because of the leaps and bounds made in forensic science. If anything, that should be a case for keeping the death penalty, because it’s less likely mistakes will be made and more likely the right person will be tried for the crime. Most of the cases that have been overturned have been since 1993, clearly, when knowledge has increased to the point of aptly finding the truth. Perhaps, with forensic science, there will be less margin for error.

This is what makes Duncan's case a bad place to "crusade" for abolishment of capital punishment.  He's admitted it.  There is no question as to whether he's done it -- and no amount of appeals would change that outcome.  He was caught red-handed with the girl and confessed he did the crimes.  According to the article I read, there is no doubt Duncan is guilty.   Therefore, he should accept the consequences of his crimes.  What gets to me more than anything at all is that the legal system seems to have failed all of Duncan's victims, past and present, and if the death penalty is abolished as a result of this trial, that will have been his legacy.  He'll have come out of this somewhat of a hero for those who oppose the death penalty, and there will be no justice for the Groene family or the other families Duncan has tortured, tormented, raped and murdered.  All hail the perpetrator!  

Tonight several topics came up, and it seems that my Mormon friend Storm was right in the midst of it all.  The two topics that consistently come up in our discussions are...

1.  The authenticity of the Bible.

2.  The Triune Godhead.

I think I probably need to make a post explaining where I stand with the Bible, first. 

Then I will make an argument for the Trinity as Bible-Believing Christians know it. 

Feel free to leave comments if you think you have anything helpful on either of these topics.

Hi, everyone. I haven't posted in here in a while, but winter is coming soon, so I know I'll be spending more time indoors.

Recently, I've been hanging out in Yahoo Christian Chat 3. While there, I've met some really interesting people. It's not like you might think... a Christian run and operated place. It's diverse with lots of people representing lots of different beliefs.

I've gotten a soft spot for a guy I'll call "Storm." He's a Mormon and he's recently given me a website to examine. It's right here.  Since Mormonism vs Christianity is such a vast topic, I've decided to go ahead and publicly examine things one at a time right here on my blog.

I'll probably be posting some things about Judaism, too.  I've met a delightful Jewish woman I'll call "Metookah."  I just love listening to her.  She adamantly denies Christ is Lord, though, and I know some interesting topics will develop, and I'll want to discuss them with you here. She gets kind of mad when people tell her she needs Jesus to be saved, but then she gets mad at me, too, when I tell her I believe that God's not done with the Jews yet (Romans 11).  :)  But mostly she just likes to talk and exchange thoughts.  Tonight I listened to her talk with a guy called "ex_christian," and she really defended her faith well. 

One thing is for sure... these are all very intelligent people, so I respect them, and adore them.  They all have unique and wonderful personalities.  It can be a bash-fest at times, but usually it works itself out. 

There's a few flirtatious men in there, but they're pretty harmless. :)

Hope all is well with you. 

There's a lot of whining, complaining and boycotting LJ because of their recent action to suspend some journals and communities that may be outside of LJ policy in promoting pedophilia, murder, abuse, etc. There have been some journals/communities suspended that maybe didn't deserve to be. But LJ has been very apologetic and is working very hard to correct any problems. I know I would be bothered if this affected my use of the journal, but at the same time, I am very thankful that LiveJournal isn't willing to promote any kind of mayhem. I'm glad they're trying to do something about this problem. They're taking a lot of flak and criticism about being the "thought police" etc. Today I'm going to renew my extra user pics and buy time on all my accounts. I may even buy some of you something. Pass on the good will if you can, but if you can't here's a way to show your support for LJ.





Please credit: slidewithme for the icon and the banner. I'll be putting it on my user info page as soon as I make this comment.

Also, if you have time, it wouldn't hurt to run by the news page http://news.livejournal.com/ and give them some encouragement to offset some of the drama.

Sleeping Beauty, Tom Thumb, and Quasimodo were all talking one day.

Sleeping Beauty said, "I believe myself to be the most beautiful girl  in
the world."

Tom Thumb said, "I must be the smallest person in the world."

Quasimodo said, "I absolutely have to be the most disgusting person in the
world."

 They all decided to go to the Guinness Book of World Records to have their
claims verified.

 Sleeping Beauty went in first and came out looking deliriously happy.
"It's official; I AM the most beautiful girl in the world."

 Tom Thumb went next and emerged triumphant,
"I AM now officially the smallest person in the world."

 Sometime later, Quasimodo comes out looking utterly confused and says...
"Who the heck is Rosie O'Donnell?

Please pray for the  Kansas tornado victims and their families.

 

( Glenn Beck talks to Lahaye, Jenkins and Rosenburg about the end times... )

I participated in this thread in christianity .  Try as I might, I can't seem to get across the point that I'm not trying to harm anyone, but that I care about people who are misled by the LDS leadership.  Here is an exerpt from the thread: 

I don't think anyone is going to get the "gold star" for getting every doctrine right. From my observation I could be a part of any number of denominations and be in unity with them, though I might not agree with everything taught there. There are small differences that do not matter. I do not think that is the case between Christianity and Mormonism. There are very large differences that are not something Christians should put aside for the sake of unity. The Bible does say, 2 Corinthians 6: 14 Do not be bound together with unbelievers; for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness? 15 Or what harmony has Christ with Belial, or what has a believer in common with an unbeliever? 16 Or what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; just as God said, "I WILL DWELL IN THEM AND WALK AMONG THEM; AND I WILL BE THEIR GOD, AND THEY SHALL BE MY PEOPLE. 17 "Therefore, COME OUT FROM THEIR MIDST AND BE SEPARATE," says the Lord. "AND DO NOT TOUCH WHAT IS UNCLEAN; And I will welcome you. 18 "And I will be a father to you, And you shall be sons and daughters to Me," Says the Lord Almighty.

You either believe the Bible, or don't, in my opinion. If there is any part of it you can't believe, you might as well not use it at all, because you will have no solid standard. I choose to have a standard. I would contend that anyone who doesn't believe in the Bible is not a Christian. They can claim to be Christians, but if they reject the Bible, they reject the very thing that teaches us of Christ. I am not God, so I have neither power or desire to take away someone's salvation. What concerns me is that someone may think they're saved when they've never had it in the first place. I agree that there are Mormons who appear to be very upright people, but only God knows the motivation of their hearts. Same is true of Christians.... some appear to be upright, but only God knows the motivation of their hearts. I don't think everyone who says they are a Christian is a Christian.

If the Mormons are depending on Joseph Smith for their salvation at all, they are different than Christians. I believe their are some Mormons who have no idea what the church really teaches and it's possible that they only know the good that is taught. I believe that God will bless those people. But it's a scary line and my only concern is that they are being deceived and may never see what they think they'll see, just as the suicide bombers of Radical Islam will never see the virgins they are promised.

I can't count how many times I've heard others say to me, "to each his own," or "why can't you just let people worship how they want to?"  I can't control anyone but myself, but I feel that if I did not at least make an effort to make a case for true Christianity that I would be a bad witness and there could even possibly be Mormon blood on my hands.  It's not about what I might get out of helping someone to true salvation, but what they get out of it.  I can only hope people will start to listen and understand.

Blessings to you.

Not a chance.  I've just been really busy.  I have lots of posts planned, but first things first.  Note my new icon and feel free to use it.  No credit necessary.  :-D I love it.  It's right in the Bible folks! 

Those of you who replied to the post for things you'd like me to post about, I haven't forgotten you.  Eventually, you'll be scrolling your friend page and see it roll by. 

I have ideas for other opinion posts, but I'd kind of like to get to know those of you who are watching so far. Is there anything you'd be interested in talking about -- an issue... something you want to know my opinion about... something you have an opinion about?

During the five-minute court session the judge said Soliman was guilty and would serve three years for insulting Islam and inciting sedition, and one year for insulting Mr Mubarak.

"An Egyptian court has sentenced a blogger to four years' prison for insulting Islam and the president."

As Americans, we don't know how blessed we really are.  I'm writing a blog entry and I can say almost anything I want about President Bush, good or bad.  I could insult Christianity.  I could even insult Islam and I might take some flak for it, but nobody will be sending me to prison for even five minutes, nevermind four years.  And all of that is because I live in a free country.  And I live in a free country because I had leaders and brave men who were willing to fight for it.
Bloggers all over the world get away with insulting President Bush.  It's shameful.  I don't think it's worthy of prison, but it's shameful.  In fact, the place I swiped this icon from is downright repulsive.  Don't click on this link unless you can stomach it.  It's vulgar.  It's disgraceful.  It's even sleezy.  It reminds me of the negative list of things right before the fruit of the Spirit in Galatians. 

Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality,  impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions,  envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit  the kingdom of God.

I've often felt like some of the things that are going on in our country online, in the news, in the newspapers are borderline treason, or at the very least, unpatriotic.  And President Bush bites his tongue and forges on hoping for the best.  It seems to me sometimes, like we've turned into this bunch of childish, wimpering, whining snivelers, instead of the way it should be -- tall-standing, unified, republic.  Perhaps I've been naive.  I was raised differently than this.  It makes me nauseous and teary. 

Yet a 22-year-old man in Egypt gets four years in PRISON for using the language "dictator" when speaking of the president there and "university of terrorism" when referring to his school. 

And some Americans actually fear a Christian theocracy. 

To Kill or Not to Kill

One Sunday after Saddam Hussein was hung, I said to a teacher at my church that I was glad that Hussein wasn’t around anymore. He gently, but firmly, chided me. “Why should we ever kill? We should never kill.” I have a lot of respect for him, but his question/statement caused me to ask myself, Is it ever okay to kill?

Three scriptures came to mind immediately. Genesis 9:6, Exodus 20:7-17, and Ecclesiastes 3:1-10. In these three scriptures are three contexts of killing. They are murder, capitol punishment, and war. I will make the case that the first of these is never an option, but the latter two are not only permissible, but at times, necessary.

( Scriptures Under the Cut )

In the first scripture (Gen. 9), it shows both sides of the coin. Those who kill will be killed, and not by God, but by man who was made in God’s image. Hussein was a tyrant who killed his own people by the hundreds and thousands for no good reason. He had his day in court. He was tried, convicted and eventually killed by men for the men he had killed. I praise God for that. That was a provision made by God clear back in the days of Noah. Hussein was defiant and never showed any kind of remorse. His heart was hard. But nevertheless, our Creator said, “Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed.” I am for capitol punishment. If we adhered to the provision made by the Lord in the days of Noah, there would be no question of what to do about the likes of Joseph Edward Duncan III and John Couey, but that’s another post for another day.

The only times I can recall Lord Jesus the Christ ever addressing whether or not to kill was in the context of the ten commandments when the rich ruler wanted to know what he must do to inherit eternal life. And then when He questioned those who wanted His own life, again referring back to the law. There were crosses along the roadside by the thousands that Jesus witnessed, death and killing everywhere, yet He said little about it. The two who died beside Him were thieves, not murderers, yet they hung on crosses, guilty. The Lord implored us to be obedient to the law of the land when He said to render to Caesar what is Caesar’s.

Ecclesiastes 3, says there is “a time to kill” and “a time of war.” As much as I hate the idea of American soldiers getting killed and even the thought of my son having to die in a war, someday, I realize there is a time for war. I believe that the Iraqi war was necessary and timely. I’d hoped it would have gone smoother and quicker. Still, the Iraqi government was not compliant with several of the UN resolutions and they were not accountable for the weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). Regardless of whether there were WMDs found in Iraq, and we can debate that all day, it doesn’t matter. They had them and they were not accountable for them. Perhaps they sold them to the Iranians or the Syrians, nevertheless, they were to be accountable. We cannot allow Iraq to continue to be a breeding ground for terrorists. If we leave now, it will be prematurely, the government will not stand, and terror will abound. We need to secure Bagdad. It is such a helpless feeling hearing that voice quieted. How can America stand in America if we haven’t the guts to stand in Iraq?

Thou shalt not kill, or he will be killed by man. There is a time to kill and a time of war. It is unreasonable to say we should never kill.

662/1073

American Idol addiction is rampant across the country and my house is no exception. All four of us get into it. Everyone in our family is musical. I sing, play the flute and am learning to play the piano. Tristen, my 10-year-old daughter, sings and plays the piano. My 13-year-old son, Bradley, plays saxophone and is in jazz band. My husband is a very talented pianist/keyboard player. With all the scary things going on in the world, having music in our home is one of the biggest blessings we have, and American Idol affords us a few hours a week where we can relax and enjoy ourselves as a family.

We usually have different ideas about who should win, but we all agree the women this season are outshining the men.

My opinion is that with the exception of one woman, Antonella Barba, all of the women are better singers than the men are. Sex scandal aside, she needs to pack it up and go back to New Jersey. America needs to stop voting for her, and start voting for the real talent that is overflowing. There are a few men, as bad as the men are, who are all better than Antonella. I can’t even pick a favorite woman, because they’re all so good. But if I had to pick one at this stage of the game, it would be Melinda Doolittle. She’s got a big voice, a happy smile and a good attitude.

One of my favorite men, Nicolas Pedro, got voted off March 1. It’s a lot easier to pick favorites with the men, because there are obvious choices. I think the most obvious choice is Chris Sligh, who is not only a great singer, but he’s smart, has a unique look, and a lot of confidence. Next in line is Blake Lewis, who is from my home, Washington state. Rock on, Blake. Blake is daring enough that he did music last night that none of the judges even knew. The man I would vote off is Sanjaya Malakar, also from Washington. I appreciate that whole “he’s young and inexperienced” thing Paula’s got going, but he’s either a star or he’s not, and I say he’s not.

Speaking of the judges, I think Simon gets a bad rap. Yes, I know he can be harsh, and I suppose he needs the rest of them to level him out some, but I think Ryan is getting out of hand to the point of boredom. He’s borderline childish at this point, berating everything Simon says. Simon says, “Shut up, Ryan.” Aside from how harsh Simon can be, he usually has good reason for his opinions, and I admit that more times than not, I agree with him. I wish he could be a little more like Paula, who at least gives constructive criticism when she actually gives criticism. I’d like to see her give constructive criticism more often and stop sugarcoating everything. Randy needs to use the word “pitchy” more sparingly. I think he hears things that only “dawgs” can hear.

I’m looking forward to the results, tonight. Be well.

http://www.americanidol.com/
522

One of my friends guessed that I might be voting for Rudy Giuliani in 2008, but I told him my first choice would be Newt Gingrich. As of yet, Newt hasn't announced, so if I were to vote today, I would have to vote for the candidate that has the best chance of beating any of the running democrats. That would be, in my opinion, Rudy Giuliani.

I don't like his stance on abortion, which is the woman's right to choose. However, he says he wouldn't ever recommend that choice for anyone. He says that adoption is the way to go. No, I don't see him overturning Roe vs Wade, but Bush didn't do it, either.

I'm also nervous about his stance on gun control. He claims that he was only for that in New York, where violence was rampant. He claims he turned New York around. I can't argue that.

This is what I like about him: He's for terror control. He's for finishing what we started. He's for staying the course. If my choice ends up being between Rudy Giuliani and Clinton, Obama, or Edwards, I'm voting Giuliani.