Fla passes death penalty bill

[HeirofSalvation]

I agree. It is practice.

If we killed any US resident who spoke poorly against President Biden (while serving as POTUS) imagine how kinder our political system would look.

If we would kill adulterers just think how stronger a family unit we would have

You are simply being snarky here, and that does not become you.
I am not entirely agianst the notion of stoning adulterers...
The family unity would indeed be strronger.

If we would kill women who lied about being virgins imagine how much more pure our youth would be.

Much more pure.
You would cut adultery off at the pass.
You are not scaring me with these laws dude.
Adultery is a crime against society as a whole.
It has far-reaching consequences. This is why drug use, gambling, and many other things are often illegal in many places. I pray we do not see the day when such simplistic bumper-sticker thinking dominates our legal systems.
No one sins in a vacuum.

If we killed any child who cursed at a parent think of how well behaved our children would act.

That's not what the Torah says, and if you believe that, throw your degree in the trash. Both you and your professors were lazy and did not or could not read.

If we killed anybody who advocated another religion imagine how Christian our culture would be.

God never ordered the Israelites to do so either.
We are gentiles. God never ordered the Gentiles to worship him.
2Ki 5:18
In this thing the LORD pardon thy servant, that when my master goeth into the house of Rimmon to worship there, and he leaneth on my hand, and I bow myself in the house of Rimmon: when I bow down myself in the house of Rimmon, the LORD pardon thy servant in this thing.
2Ki 5:19
And he said unto him, Go in peace. So he departed from him a little way.

If we killed all homosexuals then think how less crazy the world would be.

There is no law requiring Old Covenant Israelites to "kill homosexuals".
I know you think there is
I know why you think there is
but there isn't. There is no such law.

You sound like some internet atheist here who has never even actually read the Old Testament in a thoughful and serious way. Half of what you are saying is simply false.

For instance: If you actually believe that the Torah teaches a child should be killed for "cursing" at their parents????
You simply haven't bothered to touch the text.
Like at all.
Like ever.
Like, you've never read it, and that's lazy, and no one should take you seriously.
It simply doesn't say that.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Is this suppose to be serious?

Please tell me you are being sarcastic?

peace to you

It is serious.
I am 100% not being sarcastic.
And incredulity is not an argument.

Justice to you

 

[canadyjd]

Cain murdered Abel and God did not demand the death penalty prior to Genesis 9 and the passage referring to the blood avenger (no government death penalty because there were no governments.)

Moses murdered the Egyptian and hid his body in the sand and God did not demand the death penalty (after Genesis 9 and before the law)

David murdered Uriah the Hittite after committing adultery with his wife and God did not demand the death penalty (after the law and before Christ)

The Apostle Paul murdered Christians by his own testimony and declared himself to be the worst of sinners and God did not demand the death penalty.

And Paul gave the reason that God showed mercy to him, the worst of sinners in 1 Timothy 1…. Paul stated that God showed him mercy as an example for future Christians to follow.

Plain and simple, God has commanded us, as Christians, to show mercy to the worst of sinners, even murderers like Paul.

Killing someone is the very opposite of showing mercy. And to twist the idea of mercy to mean let’s kill them quickly so they don’t have to suffer in prison is completely incompatible with biblical teaching on mercy.

peace to you

 

[canadyjd]

It is serious.
I am 100% not being sarcastic.
And incredulity is not an argument.

Justice to you

I wasn’t talking to you. I was talking to JonC

peace to you

 

[JonC]

Is this suppose to be serious?

Please tell me you are being sarcastic?

peace to you

Kinda serious. If we were to apply the Law then yes, that would be the consequence. We like to treat Scripture as if it were a smorgasbord (take what suits us, leave what doesn't).

But, they f course, we are not under the Law. So it isn't something I'm advocating. I can say Biden is a few beers short of a six pack and even post that on an internet forum.

 

[JonC]

Cain murdered Abel and God did not demand the death penalty prior to Genesis 9 and the passage referring to the blood avenger (no government death penalty because there were no governments.)

Moses murdered the Egyptian and hid his body in the sand and God did not demand the death penalty (after Genesis 9 and before the law)

David murdered Uriah the Hittite after committing adultery with his wife and God did not demand the death penalty (after the law and before Christ)

The Apostle Paul murdered Christians by his own testimony and declared himself to be the worst of sinners and God did not demand the death penalty.

And Paul gave the reason that God showed mercy to him, the worst of sinners in 1 Timothy 1…. Paul stated that God showed him mercy as an example for future Christians to follow.

Plain and simple, God has commanded us, as Christians, to show mercy to the worst of sinners, even murderers like Paul.

Killing someone is the very opposite of showing mercy. And to twist the idea of mercy to mean let’s kill them quickly so they don’t have to suffer in prison is completely incompatible with biblical teaching on mercy.

peace to you

I agree. I was speaking of the demands of the Law. I am not saying those rules applied prior to the Old Covenant, to those not under the Old Covenant, or to us.

 

[JonC]

You are simply being snarky here, and that does not become you.
I am not entirely agianst the notion of stoning adulterers...
The family unity would indeed be strronger.


Much more pure.
You would cut adultery off at the pass.
You are not scaring me with these laws dude.
Adultery is a crime against society as a whole.
It has far-reaching consequences. This is why drug use, gambling, and many other things are often illegal in many places. I pray we do not see the day when such simplistic bumper-sticker thinking dominates our legal systems.
No one sins in a vacuum.

That's not what the Torah says, and if you believe that, throw your degree in the trash. Both you and your professors were lazy and did not or could not read.

God never ordered the Israelites to do so either.
We are gentiles. God never ordered the Gentiles to worship him.
2Ki 5:18
In this thing the LORD pardon thy servant, that when my master goeth into the house of Rimmon to worship there, and he leaneth on my hand, and I bow myself in the house of Rimmon: when I bow down myself in the house of Rimmon, the LORD pardon thy servant in this thing.
2Ki 5:19
And he said unto him, Go in peace. So he departed from him a little way.

There is no law requiring Old Covenant Israelites to "kill homosexuals".
I know you think there is
I know why you think there is
but there isn't. There is no such law.

You sound like some internet atheist here who has never even actually read the Old Testament in a thoughful and serious way. Half of what you are saying is simply false.

For instance: If you actually believe that the Torah teaches a child should be killed for "cursing" at their parents????
You simply haven't bothered to touch the text.
Like at all.
Like ever.
Like, you've never read it, and that's lazy, and no one should take you seriously.
It simply doesn't say that.

I don't mean it snarky. I was simply speaking of the Old Covenant. We like to apply what suits us but not what doesn't.

Does the Old Covenant actually teach that a child who cursed or strikes his or her parent is to be stoned by the entire community? Yes, it does.

Does it teach that dishonoring those in authority will be put to death? Yes, it does.

That is the thing about the Old Covenant. It was not about redemption or forgiveness (although it ultimately points to this). It was about keeping a nation (Israel) holy.

Let me ask you

Exodus 21:17 “He who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death."

Do you believe that means he who cursed his parent shall surely be out to death? Or does it mean something else?

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Cain murdered Abel and God did not demand the death penalty prior to Genesis 9 and the passage referring to the blood avenger (no government death penalty because there were no governments.)

That's two arguments, not one...
Actually neither is an argument, but mere statements of fact.
God did not chose to DO a certain thing...therefore we must not or should not do a certain thing.
The problem is, you haven't given us the undistributed middle.
What's the proposition in the middle which states we should replicate this event?
The assumption that this is ideal, is not supported. You are simply recounting an event.
Hey, guess what Absolom raped David's concubines...
That's an event.
It happened.
So what? What is the actual argument?

Moses murdered the Egyptian and hid his body in the sand and God did not demand the death penalty (after Genesis 9 and before the law)

Moses killed a dude.
God didn't subsequently kill Moses...
Again an historical statement of what transpired:
A perfect example of deriving an "ought" from an "is".

(Let's ignore that God was literally going to kill him simply for being uncircumcised a few chapters later [not even for killing a dude]..but we're anti-death penalty advocates and therefore our arguments are thoughtless and stupid)...
Exo 4:24
And it came to pass by the way in the inn, that the LORD met him, and sought to kill him.

David murdered Uriah the Hittite after committing adultery with his wife and God did not demand the death penalty (after the law and before Christ)

David killed dudes. David sinned a lot and such...
Therefore, God is against the death penalty.
Ingenious: I'm convinced.

The Apostle Paul murdered Christians by his own testimony and declared himself to be the worst of sinners and God did not demand the death penalty.

Paul sucked prior to being saved....therefore, the death penalty is un-biblical.
It follows, I'm sure, I don't know how.
I don't know the propositions which lead to this conclusion, but they are there I'm sure.

And Paul gave the reason that God showed mercy to him, the worst of sinners in 1 Timothy 1…. Paul stated that God showed him mercy as an example for future Christians to follow.

God shows us mercy.........
He does that only because he has demanded the death penalty of his own Son.....
But, there's an argument here, I'm sure of it.
It's there, I know it's there.

Plain and simple, God has commanded us, as Christians, to show mercy to the worst of sinners, even murderers like Paul.

And, "Plain and simple" the government bears the sword for a reason, and God has established it that way.
Be a "Christian"...
If you are a "Christian" in government, please bear the sword God has instituted the government to do.
Please do.

Killing someone is the very opposite of showing mercy.

Caging someone up for 50 years is the opposite of showing mercy.


Justice to you.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

I don't mean it snarky. I was simply speaking of the Old Covenant. We like to apply what suits us but not what doesn't.

I don't.
It all applies. But, I'm a gentile.
The Law (Torah) was never to us.........ever. God so totally never pretended it was about Japhethites at all.
Like, we were totally not in view.

Does the Old Covenant actually teach that a child who cursed or strikes his or her parent is to be stoned by the entire community? Yes, it does

.
Generally, it was a lifestyle, it includes drunkenness, and repeated offenses, so, you're still not being completely honest with the text.....
And it specifically mentions Sons, and not daughters so...
Does it teach that dishonoring those in authority will be put to death? Yes, it does.

That is the thing about the Old Covenant

.
The thing about the Old Covenant is that Jon C is not really a participant in it, and it is not about you at all.
It points to a future that is about you, and a redemptive plan that includes you. And the Jews didn't see it.
They didn't see it, because God never intended them to see it that way, and it was a mystery only revealed at the cross.
It not only fooled them, but, Satan and his demons as well.

It was not about redemption or forgiveness (although it ultimately points to this).

Sure it was. There was ample forgiveness and mercy throughout it. And grace and atonement for the whole nation.
As much as there were laws.....There were always provisions of grace for the inevitable breaking of them, and they were not hard at all to follow.

It was about keeping a nation (Israel) holy.

Sure, the Nation should be holy. It was called out (created uniquely even) to be holy.

Let me ask you
Exodus 21:17 “He who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death."

Let me ask you...Were you taught to read this in a vacuum?
Let's apply this the way Moses specifies:
Deu 21:18
If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:
Deu 21:19
Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;
Deu 21:20
And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.
Deu 21:21
And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

Do you believe that means he who cursed his parent shall surely be out to death?

Do you believe in actually doing so meaningful research, and spending some time studying Torah's applications, or do you jump to conclusions with one-liners like an internet troll?

Or does it mean something else?

It means exactly what it says, but it doesn't stop with Exodus, and it isn't one-liner internet troll bait.
It takes actual work to study the Bible (specifically the Torah) and come to meaningful conclusions.
To quote C.S. Lewis: "My what are they teaching them in these schools?"

 

[canadyjd]

The command of our Lord Jesus Christ to show mercy to the worst of sinners, even murderers like Paul, is found in 1 Timothy 1:15-16.

I would encourage you to read it and accept it as the command of our Lord Jesus that it is. Christians should not support the death penalty.

BTW, I don’t expect to get Justice, I expect mercy when I stand before God. I hope all Christians get mercy instead of justice.

peace to you

 

[JonC]

I don't.
It all applies. But, I'm a gentile.
The Law (Torah) was never to us.........ever. God so totally never pretended it was about Japhethites at all.
Like, we were totally not in view.
.
Generally, it was a lifestyle, it includes drunkenness, and repeated offenses, so, you're still not being completely honest with the text.....
And it specifically mentions Sons, and not daughters so...
Does it teach that dishonoring those in authority will be put to death? Yes, it does.

.
The thing about the Old Covenant is that Jon C is not really a participant in it, and it is not about you at all.
It points to a future that is about you, and a redemptive plan that includes you. And the Jews didn't see it.
They didn't see it, because God never intended them to see it that way, and it was a mystery only revealed at the cross.
It not only fooled them, but, Satan and his demons as well.

Sure it was. There was ample forgiveness and mercy throughout it. And grace and atonement for the whole nation.
As much as there were laws.....There were always provisions of grace for the inevitable breaking of them, and they were not hard at all to follow.

Sure, the Nation should be holy. It was called out (created uniquely even) to be holy.

Let me ask you...Were you taught to read this in a vacuum?
Let's apply this the way Moses specifies:
Deu 21:18
If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:
Deu 21:19
Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;
Deu 21:20
And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.
Deu 21:21
And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

Do you believe in actually doing so meaningful research, and spending some time studying Torah's applications, or do you jump to conclusions with one-liners like an internet troll?

It means exactly what it says, but it doesn't stop with Exodus, and it isn't one-liner internet troll bait.
It takes actual work to study the Bible (specifically the Torah) and come to meaningful conclusions.
To quote C.S. Lewis: "My what are they teaching them in these schools?"

I agree with most of what you say here.

Paul tells us that we are not under the Law, that the Law ended and applied only to a specific people at a specific time. This is told to us in Deuteronomy as well. My point is not about you but that many Christians turn to the Old Covenant Law to justify contemporary issues. And that is wrong.

Where I disagree is in your dismissal (I take it as a dismissal) of the instructions to Israel. I know it does not apply to us, but it is wrong to reason away Scripture. The passage literally instructs Israel to kill those people.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

I agree with most of what you say here.
Paul tells us that we are not under the Law, that the Law ended and applied only to a specific people at a specific time. This is told to us in Deuteronomy as well. My point is not about you but that many Christians turn to the Old Covenant Law to justify contemporary issues. And that is wrong.

I agree here:
It is of value in the sense that it provides general principles and a moral framework. The specifics are unique to Israel. Ususally, there is a deeper principle upon which any particular law stands. These are always of value to us.

Where I disagree is in your dismissal (I take it as a dismissal) of the instructions to Israel. I know it does not apply to us, but it is wrong to reason away Scripture. The passage literally instructs Israel to kill those people.

Indeed it does... But I cannot find myself taking umbrage at those texts. While some of these laws seem (or may seem) unconscionable to us today (and I do not think that is bad). We cannot think our personal morality is superior to what God instructed the Israelites to do. So, if I sound dismissive, I should not be. I should not dismiss them, and I don't. I think we essentially agree on how it applies to us. That is (for the most part) a general or deeper and foundational principle which should under-gird all of our laws and moral structures today.

 

[JonC]

I agree here:
It is of value in the sense that it provides general principles and a moral framework. The specifics are unique to Israel. Ususally, there is a deeper principle upon which any particular law stands. These are always of value to us.

Indeed it does... But I cannot find myself taking umbrage at those texts. While some of these laws seem (or may seem) unconscionable to us today (and I do not think that is bad). We cannot think our personal morality is superior to what God instructed the Israelites to do. So, if I sound dismissive, I should not be. I should not dismiss them, and I don't. I think we essentially agree on how it applies to us. That is (for the most part) a general or deeper and foundational principle which should under-gird all of our laws and moral structures today.

I agree.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

The command of our Lord Jesus Christ to show mercy to the worst of sinners, even murderers like Paul, is found in 1 Timothy 1:15-16.

I agree, and am familiar with the passage. Also, I have a VERY GENUINE appreciation for your intentions here.
The difference, is that I see a difference between what a believer might do in their personal life vs. what Governments are required to do in a sin-sick world.
It is the job of individuals to show mercy (and love it, after all, God loves mercy).
It is the unfortunate role of Government as instituted in a world where predators will take advantage of the innocent, to bear the sword.
That is also something Paul speaks of:
They cannot be contradictions, thus, they must be understood as both being compatible truths when applied in appropriate situations.

I would encourage you to read it and accept it

Of course, I've read it, and of course I accept it:
I am sure you have read:
Rom 13:1
Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
Rom 13:2
Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
Rom 13:3
For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
Rom 13:4
For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
Rom 13:5
Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.
Rom 13:6
For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.
Rom 13:7
Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.
I also ask you to take that very seriously as well. I would argue that (assuming Genesis 9) Government has been instituted for the purpose of constraining evil....and the "evil" should quake in terror of Government.
It is possible to argue that the Death Penalty was, if not forbidden, not instituted by God prior to Gen. 9. However, what we now call the "Dispensation of Government" is presently extant:
We need them, and unfortunately, the world does not function without it.

as the command of our Lord Jesus that it is. Christians should not support the death penalty.

However, you do not wish us to practice "mercy" as you claim:
You want us to punish criminals. You do indeed want the "terror" of Government upon evil-doers. And, you are quite correct to insist upon it, because I have no doubt you have read and also consider the passages I have posted.

My argument is that:You have drawn an arbitrary distinction between locking a man up for decades (or the rest of his life) and simply executing him outright.

Locking a man up is simply NOT "mercy". It is punishment: (it is "bearing the sword").

One is not more inherently "merciful" than the other:
They are both terrifying prospects, which are not consistent with showing "mercy".
It is government "wrath" against wickedness either way, and therefore, the enjoinder to love or show "mercy" is not at issue here.

BTW, I don’t expect to get Justice, I expect mercy when I stand before God

And you will receive it!
Therefore:
God will not imprison you for decades and pretend that that is called "mercy" to do so.
You will, in fact, not be guilty before God on judgment day: You will be innocent, more accurately, and in no need of mercy truth be told.

When I stand guilty before earthly government: I do not expect "mercy" I expect them to bear the sword as Paul has written to us.

I hope all Christians get mercy instead of justice.

Before God, Christians will:
Sinners will receive "justice" not mercy.

Before earthly Government which God has established: neither the Sinner nor the Saint should expect either one.

peace to you

And to you:
I appreciate your contribution to this discussion.

I love this gem from "Newsong" (no it isn't that stupid "Christmas shoes" song)
Innocent Man - YouTube
They are originally from Sebring, Florida, so, they would come to our Church on Sunday mornings! Ah, life was good in the elder days when Christian music artists weren't Theological illiterates.

 

[canadyjd]

I agree, and am familiar with the passage. Also, I have a VERY GENUINE appreciation for your intentions here.
The difference, is that I see a difference between what a believer might do in their personal life vs. what Governments are required to do in a sin-sick world.
It is the job of individuals to show mercy (and love it, after all, God loves mercy).
It is the unfortunate role of Government as instituted in a world where predators will take advantage of the innocent, to bear the sword.
That is also something Paul speaks of:
They cannot be contradictions, thus, they must be understood as both being compatible truths when applied in appropriate situations.

Of course, I've read it, and of course I accept it:
I am sure you have read:
Rom 13:1
Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
Rom 13:2
Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
Rom 13:3
For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
Rom 13:4
For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
Rom 13:5
Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.
Rom 13:6
For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.
Rom 13:7
Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.
I also ask you to take that very seriously as well. I would argue that (assuming Genesis 9) Government has been instituted for the purpose of constraining evil....and the "evil" should quake in terror of Government.
It is possible to argue that the Death Penalty was, if not forbidden, not instituted by God prior to Gen. 9. However, what we now call the "Dispensation of Government" is presently extant:
We need them, and unfortunately, the world does not function without it.

However, you do not wish us to practice "mercy" as you claim:
You want us to punish criminals. You do indeed want the "terror" of Government upon evil-doers. And, you are quite correct to insist upon it, because I have no doubt you have read and also consider the passages I have posted.

My argument is that:You have drawn an arbitrary distinction between locking a man up for decades (or the rest of his life) and simply executing him outright.

Locking a man up is simply NOT "mercy". It is punishment: (it is "bearing the sword").

One is not more inherently "merciful" than the other:
They are both terrifying prospects, which are not consistent with showing "mercy".
It is government "wrath" against wickedness either way, and therefore, the enjoinder to love or show "mercy" is not at issue here.

And you will receive it!
Therefore:
God will not imprison you for decades and pretend that that is called "mercy" to do so.
You will, in fact, not be guilty before God on judgment day: You will be innocent, more accurately, and in no need of mercy truth be told.

When I stand guilty before earthly government: I do not expect "mercy" I expect them to bear the sword as Paul has written to us.

Before God, Christians will:
Sinners will receive "justice" not mercy.

Before earthly Government which God has established: neither the Sinner nor the Saint should expect either one.

And to you:
I appreciate your contribution to this discussion.

I love this gem from "Newsong" (no it isn't that stupid "Christmas shoes" song)
Innocent Man - YouTube
They are originally from Sebring, Florida, so, they would come to our Church on Sunday mornings! Ah, life was good in the elder days when Christian music artists weren't Theological illiterates.

And finally…. I agree, for the most part with your assessment.

As I stated in my first response to this OP, I don’t believe Christians should support the DP. At the same time I recognize God has given the power of the sword (DP), to governments.

How Christians cope with these truths is up to them and God.

For me, I oppose the DP, not because I’m liberal (I am conservative on nearly everything but this) or that I want to feel good about myself, but because I believe I am following God’s Word.

Now, concerning the other very good points you have made concerning the horrible conditions in prisons and the insanity of ultra long sentences, I would agree there is much needed improvement in those areas.

I don’t, however, think the answer is killing people rather than long sentences.

thanks for the conversation. I’m glad we found agreement.

peace to you

 

[HeirofSalvation]

And finally…. I agree, for the most part with your assessment.

As I stated in my first response to this OP, I don’t believe Christians should support the DP. At the same time I recognize God has given the power of the sword (DP), to governments.

How Christians cope with these truths is up to them and God.

For me, I oppose the DP, not because I’m liberal (I am conservative on nearly everything but this) or that I want to feel good about myself, but because I believe I am following God’s Word.

Now, concerning the other very good points you have made concerning the horrible conditions in prisons and the insanity of ultra long sentences, I would agree there is much needed improvement in those areas.

I don’t, however, think the answer is killing people rather than long sentences.

thanks for the conversation. I’m glad we found agreement.

peace to you

Whilst I remain on the opposing side of that issue:
I appreciate your genuine (and needed) concerns....Even If I ultimately disagree with your conclusions, that does not mean, that I need to forget the concerns you (rightfully) have.
No system is perfect: And you bring up meaningful issues which need to be addressed.
God bless you brother!