[AussieJoe]

Unfortunately we don’t have the death penalty here in Australia, subsequently we have horrific offenders becoming a huge drain on society and if released often becoming repeat offenders.

So, does the literal interpretation of the Bible only apply the act of murder? What about in the case of one contracting another to commit the murder? assisting it the commission without being the one that actually kills? drunk driver kills an innocent? I’d argue that most if not all those cases warrant the death penalty as an option.

If I had to I’d kill to protect my family from harm, even non-lethal harm (e.g. from physical or sexual assault) would I then be subject to the death penalty?

...lots of questions in my mind about this topic, I wish it would be publicly debated here but unfortunately we’re a bit of a nanny state.

[The Ignorant Fisherman]

We here in America do have it. Not in every state though. But those individuals sit on death row for years and years. I agree that the vices and violent acts perpetrated on individuals that you stated do warrant the death penalty. That may be to strong for some. Crime in America is out of control and all these deviants get is a slap on the wrist. That is why we are reaping the consequences of these vices.

[Not just another dumb blonde]

“If I had to I’d kill to protect my family from harm, even non-lethal harm (e.g. from physical or sexual assault) would I then be subject to the death penalty?”

This is not murder, this is self-defense. If it wasn’t okay to defend yourself or loved ones, why did God send the Israelites out to do battle so much? They were defending themselves.

[Harmless Teddy Bear]

One of the OT rules was that if a man broke into your house and you killed him it was ruled self defense. It was expected that a man would protect his life, family and property with lethal force if necessary.

On the other hand bopping your neighbor over the head because you wanted him to stop singing was right out.