2006-09-12 03:56:30 · 26 answers · asked by Rodney's Ghost 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
It no longer should be used. That was the way it was during biblical day in the old testament, before there were courts and modern law.
2006-09-12 03:59:07 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No as in the UK we do not have the death penalty for people that commit murders.
The quote you refer to is draconian and Neanderthalic, I think the bible also says something about turning the other cheek.
I can see why you would say that eye for an eye is fair, as when I was assaulted all I wanted to do to my attacker was kick the hell out of him, but I am tiny and that would not have been possible, so I figured the best way to get redress is seek legal justice.
So I guess what I am saying here is that 'an eye for an eye' does not have to be physical or taken literally.
Also in the UK we have the Criminal Cases compensation and I imagine if someone ripped your eye out or pulled your tooth out you would get a substantial amount of compensation.
2006-09-13 19:45:12 · answer #2 · answered by Sky 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
An "eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" is fair and just, but mercy and forgiveness is far more powerful
2006-09-12 11:11:17 · answer #3 · answered by Wemy 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No sometimes it's an eye for a tooth or a tooth for an eye.
2006-09-12 10:58:30 · answer #4 · answered by Rockhead 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, not fair every time. There are always exceptions.
For instance, mentally ill people who commit crimes- unknowingly. Now I'll admit, this is a defense used WAY too often by simply sane people who lost control. Too bad for those who truly need to use that line.
2006-09-12 11:06:15 · answer #5 · answered by rottymom02 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What happens when the offender has no eyes or teeth? I suppose you would have to substitute other parts, like a thumb for a bum, a willy for a left toe, boobs for knees etc.
2006-09-12 11:03:36 · answer #6 · answered by badgerbeetle 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is one of the most misunderstood phrases in the Bible.
It is meant to limit revenge (personal or state-initiated) to the severity of the original crime, and no more.
It is not meant to say that if somebody plucks out your eye, you must do the same to them.
2006-09-12 11:05:27 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Nothing is ever fair in all cases
2006-09-12 11:53:14 · answer #8 · answered by Lou 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No,it depends on the circumstances of each individual case.
2006-09-12 17:10:16 · answer #9 · answered by Lola 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes revenge is a dish best served cold
2006-09-12 11:01:41 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋