RE:
"Vengeance killings or "an eye for an eye" don't bring back the original
people who died. Also, vengence killings are not acceptable
in the true Christian spirit of "thou shalt not kill".
McVeigh was obviously deranged. How simplistic to even consider that
"proportionality" or "recompense" for the massive individual and
collective loss would be cloning and executing en masse."
I agree, and would add that killing is not the way to teach people that
killing is wrong, and it says very little about the sanctity of life (all
life). What gives anyone the right to say that some deserve to live over
others, or rather, that some deserve to die?
Jessica
At 03:30 PM 3/13/99 -0800, you wrote:
>>Each one of those
>>dead people had irreplaceable faces, families and lives. The only >way
>the
>>families of the slaughtered could have received some semblance of
>>proportionality, if not recompense, for their massive individual and
>>collective
>>loss would have been for McVeigh to have been cloned 168 times, and
>>then for
>>them all to be executed together.
>
>Vengeance killings or "an eye for an eye" don't bring back the original
>people who died. Also, vengence killings are not acceptable
>in the true Christian spirit of "thou shalt not kill".
>McVeigh was obviously deranged. How simplistic to even consider that
>"proportionality" or "recompense" for the massive individual and
>collective loss would be cloning and executing en masse.
>If this theory is to be followed, perhaps one should think back to all
>who lost their lives in the Vietnam War and visualise thousands of US
>soldiers who killed innocent civilians also cloned and executed - but I
>doubt that this would ease anyones' burden of grief.
>GS
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
