I didn’t know this case even existed until I read Aaron’s post. Learnt more about the case from gayle and alex.
I grew up being taught that the death penalty was necessary because it was an effective deterrent as well that from a biblical perspective, we should apply ‘an eye for an eye’ doctrine.
I have come to disagree with the ‘an eye for an eye’ doctrine. That is the Old Testament, and the New Testament has different commandments. I have come to believe that the ‘an eye for an eye’ doctrine appeals to our instincts and is something we are naturally inclined to, while loving those who sin against us is the harder path yet the one God would want us to take. I do not mean we should let the criminals roam free, because for the safety of society, sometimes its best to keep them locked away. But life is sacred and it is only for God to take.
Anyway, I am digressing. Today is the day that I am formally aware that in Singapore, the law presumes you guilty and you need to prove your innocence.
And I can’t help but think of something I read once somewhere. And I believe it gives us all food for thought about why we shouldn’t be so flippant on this issue and just say ‘hang him’ (as some of the comments have) however strongly we may feel about the war on drugs and the use of hanging as a deterrent.
I googled for it and would like to share it with all of you.
When Hitler came for the Jews… I was not a Jew, therefore, I was not concerned. And when Hitler attacked the Catholics, I was not a Catholic, and therefore, I was not concerned. And when Hitler attacked the unions and the industrialists, I was not a member of the unions and I was not concerned. Then, Hitler attacked me and the Protestant church — and there was nobody left to be concerned.
Pastor Martin Niemoller
(Updated:
Interesting discussion going on at “theonlinecitizen” (29/01/07).
Questions we must asked ourselves when discussing this issue (29/01/07).
Interesting point about deterrence in Yawning Bread’s article (29/01/07).
More Information on the Tochi Case (30/01/07).
)
Rowen | 27-Jan-07 at 5:15 am | Permalink
Well just the opposite of innocent until proven guilty rite?
An incident recently happened to me.
I went shopping at a departmental store for christmas last year.
I bought a lot of toys for some of our children for a christmas party and were about to leave the departmental store. then the sensor alarm sounded. The security man immediately sprung into action and accused me for stealing. I had to show him all the articles (about 20 to 30 out of a trolley and tally with my receipt.) Then it was a mistake made by the cashier for negelecting to scan a certain article.
Yes people presume you are guilty till you prove innocent…
Sad Sad case rite?
iantimothy | 27-Jan-07 at 5:45 am | Permalink
Hey Rowen. I think the security guard was just doing his job by checking the items. But if he actually said in your face that you were stealing before confirming the items, then that is sad. Real sad. But I think there is nothing wrong with checking the items, then apologising for any inconvenience and letting you go on your way. But yeah. It does suck to be made to feel like a thief just because a casheir missed an item. It has happened to me a few times too.