Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

RE: death sentence for inocents

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

This is getting to be a very troublesome issue in the U.S. It's nothing new

that

some innocent people are punished, but until recently, cases where it can be

absolutely proven that an condemned person is innocent have been rare.

 

What has changed is the widespread availability of DNA testing. Many states are

allowing convicted criminals to have the evidence they were convicted on tested

to see if it can shown that it doesn't match their DNA.

 

This issue recently appeared in the spotlight when the governor of Illinois, a

populous and politically important state, stopped all executions there, because

more persons sentenced to death were winning their appeals than the number

being

executed.

 

The primary reason innocent persons get convicted is that those who cannot

afford their own lawyers are represented by overworked (and sometimes

incompetent or lazy) state-appointed attorneys. Another factor is police and

prosecutors concealing evidence that could prove a person innocent. Their

thinking is often, "Well this guy is a drug dealer, so what's the harm if he's

convicted of murder too?" Many police and prosecutors are strongly opposed to

giving more convicted persons access to DNA tests.

 

ys

SRd

 

|

|Varnasrama.development (AT) pamho (DOT) net

|[Varnasrama.development (AT) pamho (DOT) net]On Behalf Of Harsi

|Tuesday, November 07, 2000 2:23 PM

|Varnasrama development

|death sentence for inocents

|

|

|It,s really interesting what I saw recently on TV, that in the USA many people

|are sentenced to death and also killed, although they where innocent. In some

|cases the police forced some drug adicted people to declare themselfs guilty

|although their guilt could never be proven.

|Death sentence stil something good for a society?

|

|

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> This is getting to be a very troublesome issue in the U.S. It's nothing

> new that some innocent people are punished, but until recently, cases

> where it can be absolutely proven that an condemned person is innocent

> have been rare.

 

It's interesting that US government practically forced Ukrainian

goverment to prohibit sentence to death, and they still have this

law in many states in US.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>> This is getting to be a very troublesome issue in the U.S. It's nothing

>> new that some innocent people are punished, but until recently, cases

>> where it can be absolutely proven that an condemned person is innocent

>> have been rare.

>

>It's interesting that US government practically forced Ukrainian

>goverment to prohibit sentence to death, and they still have this

>law in many states in US.

 

That seems to be another of this strange curiositys typicaly for the US like

their vote system. Which, like one would probably see soon, although the

majority of the citizens of that state voted for one president, they will

probably be governed against their will by another president, whom the

majority did not voted for.

 

What would Prabhupada say about this? Probably demon-crazy system or?

Where does this strange system come from?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The US has more people in jail per capita than any other country in the

world, I believe. Land of the free.

 

"(Bhakta) Oleg Demtchenko (Mayapur Education - IN)" wrote:

 

> > This is getting to be a very troublesome issue in the U.S. It's nothing

> > new that some innocent people are punished, but until recently, cases

> > where it can be absolutely proven that an condemned person is innocent

> > have been rare.

>

> It's interesting that US government practically forced Ukrainian

> goverment to prohibit sentence to death, and they still have this

> law in many states in US.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>

> >

> >It's interesting that US government practically forced Ukrainian

> >goverment to prohibit sentence to death, and they still have this

> >law in many states in US.

 

Or could anyone explain to me the difference between what the Yugoslavians were

doing with the Albanian rebels (BEFORE the UN intervened) and what the

Israelis (with $3 billion in US military aid) are doing with the Palestinians?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> >

> > >

> > >It's interesting that US government practically forced Ukrainian

> > >goverment to prohibit sentence to death, and they still have this

> > >law in many states in US.

>

> Or could anyone explain to me the difference between what the Yugoslavians

> were doing with the Albanian rebels (BEFORE the UN intervened) and what

> the Israelis (with $3 billion in US military aid) are doing with the

> Palestinians?

 

I think you will like Noam Chomsky.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>> Or could anyone explain to me the difference between what the

Yugoslavians

>> were doing with the Albanian rebels (BEFORE the UN intervened) and what

>> the Israelis (with $3 billion in US military aid) are doing with the

Palestinians?

>

>I think you will like Noam Chomsky.

 

I didn,t get it, who was Noam Chomsky?

 

I was happy to get this e-mails from you, my good friends from COM. Hope you

are all happy and healthy.

 

Harsi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

|That seems to be another of this strange curiositys typically for the US like

|their vote system. Which, like one would probably see soon, although the

|majority of the citizens of that state voted for one president, they will

|probably be governed against their will by another president, whom the

|majority did not voted for.

|

|What would Prabhupada say about this? Probably demon-crazy system or?

|Where does this strange system come from?

 

As bizarre as the U.S. electoral system is, there is a logic behind it. Without

going into the details, the system is designed to balance the political power

of

those who live in rural areas against city dwellers.

 

A common problem afflicting democracies is the fact that the easiest and least

expensive way to win an election is to address the needs and desires of voters

who live in big cities. Because so many people are concentrated in a small

area,

they have similar needs and are easy to reach. When this is the case, it can

cause serious economic and social distortions.

 

For example, this has affected the distribution of food in Mexico for decades.

Politicians in power make sure that the city-dwellers have plenty of food at

prices they perceive as reasonable. This is accomplished by artificially

controlling the prices paid to farmers in the countryside, thereby keeping

them -- and everyone else in rural areas -- impoverished. However, it kept the

PRI party in power for over seventy years. There have been many similar

occurrences around the world.

 

However, the U.S. system can cause an unexpected results under rare

circumstances -- although it has happened only once, about 100 years ago, that

the loser of the popular vote became president.

 

The result of the current election now depends on the recount of votes in the

state of Florida. Although the recount of Tuesday's vote will be completed in

about four hours, the final count will not be over until November 17, when the

tally of absentee ballots cast overseas is done. Even then it may not be

finished, as there is a dispute over 19,000 ballots cast in one Florida county

which were thrown out because the voters accidentally voted for more than one

candidate (due to a poorly-designed ballot). Since those people overwhelmingly

intended to vote for Gore, this is not likely to be settled without the typical

protracted American legal battle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>This is getting to be a very troublesome issue in the U.S. It's nothing new

that

>some innocent people are punished, but until recently, cases where it can

be

>absolutely proven that an condemned person is innocent have been rare.

 

 

I wonder what would be the karmic implications when someone got executed due

to

the power of a state and than it came out that this person was not guilty of

this particular crime. Who would be implicated due to the law of karma in

that "crime" of killing an inocent person? The state authoritys personally

or the state colectively?

The man who injected the poison, or put someone on the electric chair?

Or, like it is practiced in Russia shot the "innocent" in an inatentive

moment of his, in his room in prison?

 

>What has changed is the widespread availability of DNA testing. Many states

are

>allowing convicted criminals to have the evidence they were convicted on

tested

>to see if it can shown that it doesn't match their DNA.

 

 

What does it say about the law system of a state when, like I was hearing

recently that in the US in many universitys the students of law together

with their professors organized small groups, where they can learn to be

lawyers by reinvestigating if a particular person who got sentenced to death

is indeed guilty of that crime or inocent.

 

In this way this student groups who are operating now in many cities of the

US have helped until now 83 persons who were already sentenced to death by

the state autorithies to regain their freedom from jail and their life, by

proving that they were inocent. Some were regaining their freedom after 20

years of jail and a fiew weeks before they should be killed.

 

We know the vedic system alows also the death sentence but in this modern

time the aplication of this can be very risky, isn,t it?

At least in many cases it can be very difficult to decide if someone is

indeed guilty of a particular crime.

 

>This issue recently appeared in the spotlight when the governor of

Illinois, a

>populous and politically important state, stopped all executions there,

because

>more persons sentenced to death were winning their appeals than the number

>being executed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a message dated 11/09/2000 5:42:14 PM Eastern Standard Time,

Harsidas.he (AT) t-online (DOT) de writes:

 

<<

I wonder what would be the karmic implications when someone got executed due

to

the power of a state and than it came out that this person was not guilty of

this particular crime. Who would be implicated due to the law of karma in

that "crime" of killing an inocent person? The state authoritys personally

or the state colectively? >>

 

While this theoretical person might not have been guilty of that particular

crime, if one should suffer the punishment of execution, they were obviously

implicated karmically in some crime. There are no real innocent victims in

society, as painful as that might seem. The material world is indeed a place

of suffering and there is more than enough to go around for the never ending

karmic activities everyone is involved in to one degree or another. That does

not let the prosecutors, judges, juries and executioners off the karmic hook

for being part of executing an apparently innocent person. The only hope is

to avoid being the source of another's suffering and there is only one way to

really do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> I wonder what would be the karmic implications when someone got executed

> due to the power of a state and than it came out that this person was not

> guilty of this particular crime. Who would be implicated due to the law

> of karma in that "crime" of killing an inocent person? The state

> authoritys personally or the state colectively?

 

In according with laws of Manu, the karma falls on authorities, which

conducted the court. Witnesses, who made false statements, are also

guilty of course.

 

> The man who injected the poison, or put someone on the electric chair? Or,

> like it is practiced in Russia shot the "innocent" in an inatentive moment

> of his, in his room in prison?

 

Executors are rarely know anything about their victim. I doubt that

they bear at least same amount of karma, like those, who make a judgement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9 Nov 2000, Harsi wrote:

 

> >> Or could anyone explain to me the difference between what the

> Yugoslavians

> >> were doing with the Albanian rebels (BEFORE the UN intervened) and what

> >> the Israelis (with $3 billion in US military aid) are doing with the

> Palestinians?

> >

> >I think you will like Noam Chomsky.

>

> I didn,t get it, who was Noam Chomsky?

 

Noam Chomsky is an MIT linguist who has made a name for himself as a

political, intellectual and social critic and theorist. Like Mr. Nader, he has

had a distinguished career and life of accomplishment which qualifies him well

to be a ... College professor!

 

Neither of the two is even remotely qualified to be anything other than what

they already are: political, intellectual and social critics and theorists.

And cult-circuit lecturers and in Mr. Nader's case, political activist.

 

It is common to hear Mr Chomsky and Mr. Nader on media oulets such as Pacifica

radio (WWW.Pacifica.Org), which has streaming audio versions of it's content.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a message dated 11/10/2000 12:32:10 AM Eastern Standard Time,

JivaGo (AT) FDT (DOT) Net writes:

 

> Neither of the two is even remotely qualified to be anything other than what

> they already are: political, intellectual and social critics and theorists.

> And cult-circuit lecturers and in Mr. Nader's case, political activist.

 

92,000 voters in Florida don't agree with you position here prabhu. Had Nader

been allowed to address the citizens of America who only get their news on

TV, he might have made a bigger difference in the election.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>

> 92,000 voters in Florida don't agree with you position here prabhu. Had Nader

> been allowed to address the citizens of America who only get their news on

> TV, he might have made a bigger difference in the election.

 

Had the military industrial shill sent out to co-opt the environmentally

conscious

vote, Al Gore, not given the deceptive appearance that he is enviroment

friendly

,, Nader would have gotten a lot more.

 

Gore visited a toxic waste incinerator site in pre election 1996 that was being

built within a few thousand feet of a school, right on the banks of the Ohio

River, and assured the political activists there that under a Clinton Gore

administration it would never be allowed to operate. It opened on schedule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lance Morrow: Anyone around here seen a president?

November 10, 2000

Web posted at: 1:26 PM EST (1826 GMT)

 

 

(TIME.com) -- Where is that new President of ours? I know he's here

someplace.

 

RELATED

Index

Previous Columns by Lance Morrow

 

 

 

 

 

Now you see him, now you don't.

 

The presidential election terminating the Clinton years ends in the ultimate

Clintonism -- an astonishing tie, a masterpiece of delicately balanced

ambivalence. We end by looking at a split screen, like one of those old

campaign buttons that shows you one image (Gore) if you look at it from one

angle and a different image (Bush) if you tilt it slightly. I seem to see

Clinton enter smilingly upon the chaotic scene: "Say, if y'all really can't

make up your minds, why don't we just -- I mean, if it ain't broke, don't

fix it!"

 

The Dick Morris gizmo called Clintonism was a triangulated centrism rigging

an elaborate system of moral weights and counterweights to balance itself

safely at the center of the conflicted American heart. Thus, for example,

the leftish diversity-monger from Hope canceled welfare as we know it.

 

"We are two nations," the novelist John Dos Passos wrote many years ago. Is

that it? Or are we one nation, so intricately balanced in its impulses, so

symmetrically cracked down the middle, that we cannot decide whether we are

compassionate conservatives or fascist bleeding hearts? It's not that George

Wallace was right long ago and Ralph Nader is correct now that there's not a

dime's worth of difference between a Democrat and a Republican. Allowing for

inflation, there's several dollars' worth.

 

But the American heart has long since outgrown the old simplisms in which

the parties tend to think, in which the lefties and righties of talk radio

and television tend to bray and hoot. Bill Clinton instinctively grasps the

truth of the new American sympathies. One thinker who understands them

perfectly is Alan Wolfe, a sociologist who has done admirable research in

the cross-grained, complex American attitudes toward gay rights, abortion

and other signature issues of the millennium.

 

So the great American rhinoceros has become a brilliant tightrope walker.

Who imagined that the greatest power Earth has ever known could balance its

corpulent corporate self so exquisitely and walk across the bridge into the

twenty-first century as if toeing a cable over the abyss?

 

The blessing of the election of 2000 may be that no one emerges from it with

"a mandate," for mandates are an invitation to simple-minded zealotry. The

Gingrich Republicans thought they had a mandate after the 1994 elections.

They played it hard and stupid; look at the grief they quickly came to.

 

So let not the passive-aggressives of the whining and victim-singing

entitlement left believe that the American people have franchised them to

expand their big-government-paradise dreams.

 

And let not the primitives and polluters of the screw-'em-all right start

drilling for oil in Yellowstone or mass-producing electric chairs.

 

I say that this sublimely split decision is proof of the collective

intelligence and sanity of the American electorate. Of course, either the

Bush team or the Gore team will eventually be installed -- unless they take

a suggestion that I made months ago and effect a kind of giant corporate

merger establishing for themselves a co-presidency, with one of them taking

care of business in the Oval Office while the other presides over the sleek

new corporate headquarters in someplace like Seattle or Portland.

 

But barring a mega-merger, the new administration (with Congress delicately

balanced) may find itself locked in that exquisite immobility of moderation

that may have been the goal of the voters' collective unconscious.

 

In any case, at the end of four years, President Gore or President Bush will

have to deal with Senator Hillary Clinton, who will be scaling the White

House fence with grappling hooks and claiming the old manse for her own.

 

2000 Time Inc.

 

ELECTION LINKS:

Results

VIDEO

Latest video

Speeches/ads

Celebrities

Video Search

Discussion

Battlegrounds

States

Presidential bios

Where They Stand

 

 

 

THE STATES

 

Who are your elected officials? What is the past presidential vote and

number of electoral votes in your state? What are the presidential primary

results and exit polls? Find out with these state political and election

facts.

 

WHAT'S AT STAKE

 

What's at stake in Election 2000

Senate Overview

House Overview

Governors Overview

Top races for governor

Top Senate races

Top House races

 

 

VIDEO

 

Latest video

Speeches/ads

Celebrities

Search

 

BIOGRAPHIES

 

Read biographies of the major presidential and vice presidential

candidates.

 

WHERE THEY STAND

 

See where George W. Bush and Al Gore stand on the major issues.

 

RACES

 

If you need to know who's up in 2000 and what seats are open, launch this

quick guide.

 

BATTLEGROUNDS

 

Take a look at our interactive map and background briefing on the

'battleground states' -- the states in play for the 2000 presidential

election.

 

ELECTORAL MAP

 

View our interactive popup of CNN's electoral vote analysis going into the

presidential election.

 

POLLS

 

Dig into our poll archives.

 

COMMUNITY

 

Chat

Message boards

Feedback

 

WEB WHITE AND BLUE

 

Allpolitics.com is a partner in the Web White and Blue rolling

cyber-debate, a daily online exchange among the major presidential

candidates. Look for twice-daily updates Sunday through Friday until

election day.

 

 

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----

Von: Sri Rama das <sriramadas (AT) home (DOT) com>

An: Harsi <Harsidas.he (AT) t-online (DOT) de>; Varnasrama.development (AT) pamho (DOT) net

<Varnasrama.development (AT) pamho (DOT) net>; (Bhakta) Oleg Demtchenko (Mayapur

Education - IN) <Oleg.Demtchenko (AT) pamho (DOT) net>

Datum: Donnerstag, 9. November 2000 20:24

Betreff: RE: death sentence for inocents

 

 

>|That seems to be another of this strange curiositys typically for the US

like

>|their vote system. Which, like one would probably see soon, although the

>|majority of the citizens of that state voted for one president, they will

>|probably be governed against their will by another president, whom the

>|majority did not voted for.

>|

>|What would Prabhupada say about this? Probably demon-crazy system or?

>|Where does this strange system come from?

>

>As bizarre as the U.S. electoral system is, there is a logic behind it.

Without

>going into the details, the system is designed to balance the political

power of

>those who live in rural areas against city dwellers.

>

>A common problem afflicting democracies is the fact that the easiest and

least

>expensive way to win an election is to address the needs and desires of

voters

>who live in big cities. Because so many people are concentrated in a small

area,

>they have similar needs and are easy to reach. When this is the case, it

can

>cause serious economic and social distortions.

>

>For example, this has affected the distribution of food in Mexico for

decades.

>Politicians in power make sure that the city-dwellers have plenty of food

at

>prices they perceive as reasonable. This is accomplished by artificially

>controlling the prices paid to farmers in the countryside, thereby keeping

>them -- and everyone else in rural areas -- impoverished. However, it kept

the

>PRI party in power for over seventy years. There have been many similar

>occurrences around the world.

>

>However, the U.S. system can cause an unexpected results under rare

>circumstances -- although it has happened only once, about 100 years ago,

that

>the loser of the popular vote became president.

>

>The result of the current election now depends on the recount of votes in

the

>state of Florida. Although the recount of Tuesday's vote will be completed

in

>about four hours, the final count will not be over until November 17, when

the

>tally of absentee ballots cast overseas is done. Even then it may not be

>finished, as there is a dispute over 19,000 ballots cast in one Florida

county

>which were thrown out because the voters accidentally voted for more than

one

>candidate (due to a poorly-designed ballot). Since those people

overwhelmingly

>intended to vote for Gore, this is not likely to be settled without the

typical

>protracted American legal battle.

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>As bizarre as the U.S. electoral system is, there is a logic behind it.

Without

>going into the details, the system is designed to balance the political

power of

>those who live in rural areas against city dwellers.

 

A very interesting analizes of the situation. But could something which was

designed two hundred years ago be still up to date now?

 

>However, the U.S. system can cause an unexpected results under rare

>circumstances -- although it has happened only once, about 100 years ago,

that

>the loser of the popular vote became president.

 

I heard also that the last time such a thing as now happend in the american

elections was when another son of a former president run for presidency

himself.

It seems the american heart is split when it comes to coronate a new prince.

It seems some don-t like kings.

 

>The result of the current election now depends on the recount of votes in

the

>state of Florida. Although the recount of Tuesday's vote will be completed

in

>about four hours, the final count will not be over until November 17, when

the

>tally of absentee ballots cast overseas is done. Even then it may not be

>finished, as there is a dispute over 19,000 ballots cast in one Florida

county

>which were thrown out because the voters accidentally voted for more than

one

>candidate (due to a poorly-designed ballot). Since those people

overwhelmingly

>intended to vote for Gore, this is not likely to be settled without the

typical

>protracted American legal battle.

 

Democracy can be very fascinating, at least not boring.

The collective masses thinking themselves to be the ultimate controler.

If they would only know that they are just a tiny spark of light encaged in

a sack of bones on a small spot caled NY on a mustard seed called Earth in a

buket full of mustard seeds, called univers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark Middle Mountain wrote:

 

> >

> > 92,000 voters in Florida don't agree with you position here prabhu. Had

Nader

> > been allowed to address the citizens of America who only get their news on

> > TV, he might have made a bigger difference in the election.

>

> Had the military industrial shill sent out to co-opt the environmentally

> conscious

> vote, Al Gore, not given the deceptive appearance that he is enviroment

> friendly

> ,, Nader would have gotten a lot more.

>

> Gore visited a toxic waste incinerator site in pre election 1996 that was

being

> built within a few thousand feet of a school, right on the banks of the Ohio

> River, and assured the political activists there that under a Clinton Gore

> administration it would never be allowed to operate. It opened on schedule.

 

Actually that was 1992, before they took office.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11 Nov 2000, Harsi wrote:

 

> Democracy can be very fascinating, at least not boring.

 

That's not why democracy is appreciated. The explosion of a nuclear bomb is

also fascinating.

 

> The collective masses thinking themselves to be the ultimate controler.

 

Do you really think that? Ultimate controller!

 

> If they would only know that they are just a tiny spark of light encaged in

> a sack of bones on a small spot caled NY on a mustard seed called Earth in a

> buket full of mustard seeds, called univers.

>

Again what makes you think that they are not aware of this dimension? What

really do you want to say? First of all masses don't think, it is the

individuals who think. So maybe you are saying that some of them, or most of

them are ignorant, and therefore the one who are left, those who know that

there are just "a tiny spark of light encaged..." cannot be taken in account.

Or are you saying that westerners are just not aware of this? I can see your

good wish but it gets somewhat obscure by your negativity on the subject; a

subject you describe by attributing to the masses weird superlative

comportment and thinking. Was this your intention or have I mistaken you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9 Nov 2000, Harsi wrote:

 

> I wonder what would be the karmic implications when someone got executed due

> to

> the power of a state and than it came out that this person was not guilty of

> this particular crime. Who would be implicated due to the law of karma in

> that "crime" of killing an inocent person? The state authoritys personally

> or the state colectively?

> The man who injected the poison, or put someone on the electric chair?

> Or, like it is practiced in Russia shot the "innocent" in an inatentive

> moment of his, in his room in prison?

 

Here is something that may give some clue for the above queries??!! I wonder

what it may be.....

 

>From SB Canto 1.

According to Manu, the great author of civic codes and

religious principles, even the killer of an animal is to be considered a

murderer because animal food is never meant for the civilized man, whose prime

duty is to prepare himself for going back to Godhead. He says that in the act

of killing an animal, there is a regular conspiracy by the party of sinners,

and all of them are liable to be punished as murderers exactly like a party of

conspirators who kill a human being combinedly. He who gives permission, he

who kills the animal, he who sells the slaughtered animal, he who cooks the

animal, he who administers distribution of the foodstuff, and at last he who

eats such cooked animal food are all murderers, and all of them are liable to

be punished by the laws of nature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a message dated 11/13/2000 7:55:56 AM Eastern Standard Time,

raganuga (AT) cyberway (DOT) com.sg writes:

 

<< He says that in the act

of killing an animal, there is a regular conspiracy by the party of sinners,

and all of them are liable to be punished as murderers exactly like a party

of

conspirators who kill a human being combinedly. >>

 

This is not the same thing at all. The court system is not necessarily a

conspiracy to kill human beings. Is a war a conspiracy to kill? Sometimes

it may be. Each individual involved in any action that will take the life of

another has a motive that may or may not be honest. It seems to me that it is

that intent that generates a particular karmic reaction, not the act itself.

It is best to avoid karma altogether is it not? Trying to determine another's

karma is not useful, everything that is not transcendental generates some

karma, good or bad the result is still separation from the Absolute Truth.

There is no real comfort in generating good karma. yhs Kanti dasi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>This is not the same thing at all. The court system is not necessarily a

>conspiracy to kill human beings. Is a war a conspiracy to kill?

 

Agreed. It is not the same thing. People who eat meat say that they are

not actually killing. Somebody else is killing. That is why Satra clearly

tells who all are implicated in the killing of an innocent animal.

 

The second case (court) even though is not a conspiracy but if they kill an

innocent person, out of ignorance (ignorance of laws is no excuse), they

still have a serious karmic reaction.

 

That is why the court system has to be perfect, atleast to the extant an

innocent person is not punished. That is why the law says that many

criminals may get away unpunished. But one innocent person should not be

punished. (Originating from manu Samhita?? I wonder)

 

The third case, war and court are also not the same thing.

 

> Sometimes

>it may be. Each individual involved in any action that will take the life

>of another has a motive that may or may not be honest. It seems to me that

>it is that intent that generates a particular karmic reaction, not the act

>itself.

 

No. Both the act and intent generates karmic reaction. Ignorant act may

result in less reaction, may be intentional act results in more karmic

reaction.

 

>It is best to avoid karma altogether is it not? Trying to determine

>another's

>karma is not useful, everything that is not transcendental generates some

>karma, good or bad the result is still separation from the Absolute Truth.

>There is no real comfort in generating good karma. yhs Kanti dasi

 

Yes, Yes and Yes.

 

Your humble servant,

Bhadra Govinda Das.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>

> Here is something that may give some clue for the above queries??!! I

wonder

> what it may be.....

>

> >From SB Canto 1.

> According to Manu, the great author of civic codes and

> religious principles, even the killer of an animal is to be considered a

> murderer because animal food is never meant for the civilized man, whose

prime

> duty is to prepare himself for going back to Godhead. He says that in the act

> of killing an animal, there is a regular conspiracy by the party of sinners,

> and all of them are liable to be punished as murderers exactly like a party

of

> conspirators who kill a human being combinedly. He who gives permission, he

> who kills the animal, he who sells the slaughtered animal, he who cooks the

> animal, he who administers distribution of the foodstuff, and at last he who

> eats such cooked animal food are all murderers, and all of them are liable to

> be punished by the laws of nature.

 

Just to stir some discussion - IMHO, the fact that milk comes from a cow that

is

slaughtered after no longer being productive, makes drinkers of that milk

part

of the conspiracy to slaughter the cow unless they take steps to balance it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

|

|Varnasrama.development (AT) pamho (DOT) net

|Re: death sentence for inocents

 

|I wonder what would be the karmic implications when someone got executed due

to

the |power of a state and than it came out that this person was not guilty of

this |particular crime. Who would be implicated due to the law of karma in

that

"crime" of |killing an inocent person? The state authoritys personally or the

state colectively?

|The man who injected the poison, or put someone on the electric chair? Or,

like

it is |practiced in Russia shot the "innocent" in an inatentive moment of his,

in his room in

|prison?

 

The details of karma are impossible to understand because there are simply too

many factors for the oridinary person to take into account. However, here are

some general principles:

 

1) There's actually no question of an innocent person being punished. When this

appears to happen, we know that the root cause is in the victim's past actions,

though the exact source is normally too remote for us to understand (especially

since the sinful act will usually have occurred in a past lifetime).

 

Srila Prabhupada explained that capital punishment benefits the criminal by

clearing away the sin and its reaction -- even to the point where the executed

criminal is qualified for elevation to the heavenly planets. Ironically, when

the government does not use capital punishment, the suffering of the criminal

is

increased. He suffers in prison in this life, and in a future life he must

still

be killed -- but he will die without knowing it is a punishment for a past

crime. In other words, he will be punished when he appears to be innocent --

without a doubt, an additional suffering.

 

2) Srila Prabhupada tells us that a head of government receives a portion of

the

reactions to both the pious and impious deeds of the citizens. I don't remember

the percentages. Presumably, other members of the government will share also.

 

3) I thinks its obvious that if a prosecutor or police official intentionally

contributes to the condemnation of an innocent person, they are going to get

the

full brunt of the reaction. However, it also possible that an innocent person's

conviction may be due to no fault of anyone, but is simply the fructification

of

the condemned's karma.

 

4) Democratic government present a special problem. Srila Prabhupada told us

that if the voters elect unqualified leaders who generate or sanction sinful

actions, the voters also share in the overall karma created.

 

5) Conversely, this would imply that if the citizens participate in saintly

government, they are protected from these reactions.

 

6) The karmic situation of the executioner seems tough to analyze. Presumably,

if he acts without attachment, ill-motivation, or undue cruelty, he would not

be

subject to overwhelmingly bad karma -- but would share the reactions along with

the rest of the citizenry. However, we also know that any action not done for

Krishna's service brings reaction. Manu Samhita therefore prescribes atonement

for actions carried out in the course of one's daily activities and for unknown

sinful acts.

 

7) Nations also accumulate karma and experience reactions as a unit.

 

|In this way this student groups who are operating now in many cities of the

|US have helped until now 83 persons who were already sentenced to death by

|the state autorithies to regain their freedom from jail and their life, by

|proving that they were inocent. Some were regaining their freedom after 20

|years of jail and a fiew weeks before they should be killed.

|

|We know the vedic system alows also the death sentence but in this modern

|time the aplication of this can be very risky, isn,t it?

|At least in many cases it can be very difficult to decide if someone is

|indeed guilty of a particular crime.

 

Actually, the majority of the persons who have their death sentences reversed

remain in prison due to being convicted of other crimes which do not carry the

death penalty.

 

One thing I find reprehensible is that many, many police and prosecutors are

fighting tooth and nail to prevent more convicts from obtaining post-conviction

DNA tests.

 

Your servant,

Sri Rama das

 

[srirama.acbsp (AT) pamho (DOT) net]

[http://www.krishnagalleria.com]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...