Death Penalty: Justice or Sin

While surfing various news sites, I came across a story that made me read more than the title. “Speaking out for Life” written by Joel Bewely can be found at: http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/news/15544891.htm. It is the story of one woman’s battle with her conscience. Her daughter is raped and murdered and she must decide if she holds vengeance dearer than her Catholic upbringing. She was faced with a decision that I hope I never have to endure and I hope each of you reading this are never faced with this type of test either. I am not Catholic or even Christian, but I do applaud Vicki Shieber’s ability to stay true to her beliefs in the face of such awful circumstances. I found an essay I wrote a few years ago concerning the death penalty and I found that my views have not changed significantly since then. I will post it here for you all to read.

In David Gelernter’s argument, “What Do Murderers Deserve? The Death Penalty in Civilized Societies” he states, “An execution forces the community to assume forever the burden of moral certainty; it is a form of absolute speech that allows no waffling or equivocation. Deliberate murder, the community announces, is absolutely evil and absolutely intolerable, period.” Here it is seen as a deterrent, a statement to the world at large that horrendous crimes will be met with terrible justice. Murder for murder is a literal example of Lex Talionis. It is the proverbial, “Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth.”

I want to say that I agree with Mr. Gelernter’s assessment. I desperately want to say that it is fair and just to take the man’s life that took my brother’s, my sister’s, or gods forbid, my child’s. However, I am unable to whole-heartedly say those very words. I do not wish to sink to that level. I do not want to have another’s blood on my hands. Perhaps, it is a form of cowardice, but I do not want to be the one who pushes the button to send someone from this world. Therefore, I could never ask it of someone else.

Mr. Gelernter says, “We are reverting to a pre-civilized state of nature. Our natural bent in the face of murder is not to avenge the crime but to shrug it off, except in those rare cases when our own near and dear are involved. (And even then, it depends.)” I think he is absolutely correct that we are reverting. However, I believe that it is the callous attitude many harbor toward murder and sentencing someone to death that is bringing us to that point. Vengeance is not the goal of our judicial system. Punishment fitting to the crime committed is. He was also correct when he said that the death penalty forces “moral certainty” upon the community. There is no turning back once a man has been executed. You cannot undo that act. Death is forever as nothing else is.

There are many criminals that this country, this community, would be better off without. No one said that these people do not exist. I, still, do not believe that I have the right, responsibility, whatever you want to call it, to deprive someone else of his life. It was not mine to grant him; who am I to take it away? I believe that working toward prevention by changing the environments of the children would be a better place to spend my time and efforts. Children are malleable and are not set in stone. We, as a communal whole, could make a difference there. Hilary Clinton was absolutely correct when she said, “It takes a village to raise a child.” Now when will the rest of the country see that and start helping each other? That is the real question.