Comments on: Only a Lad

By: Joel Thomas

Joel Thomas — Thu, 03 Mar 2005 22:37:18 +0000

I saw a poll today that 69% of Americans oppose executing people for crimes committed as juveniles. That would seem to lend support to the idea that such punishment is cruel and unusual.

As for the Book of Genesis, I don’t believe that is any longer the gold standard for punishing murder, but rather it is the commandment of love of neighbor. Anyway, note that God spared Cain’s life. How much worse can one get than killing a brother?

Nevertheless, faith can only be used as a theological entry point and that different faith perspectives and non-faith perspectives have their place in discussion for we are not, and I do not support, theocracy.

By: Xrlq

Xrlq — Thu, 03 Mar 2005 21:19:50 +0000

Bingo. That was exactly my objection to Lawrence v. Texas, the sodomy case, at the time that was handed down. I had no use for laws against sodomy, but I also knew there was no guarantee future "constitutional" rulings would similarly match my political preferences.

By: Jennifer

Jennifer — Thu, 03 Mar 2005 20:41:29 +0000

I think the problem xlrq is pointing out and people aren’t getting is that we don’t want the COURT to set up any kind of standard. That’s a job for the legislatures and/or Congress; the legislature in this instance has a rule clearly allowing for the execution of a minor and the Missouri Supreme Court — and now the US Supreme Court — has decided that they are going to undo the will of the people, as expressed through legitimately passed legislation. That’s the real outrage, and it’s an outrage no matter where you stand on the death penalty. It’s an outrage that all of us should be concerned about; but many are willing to overlook because they like the particular outcome of the case. Pay attention, now — someday it will be an issue you DON’T agree with, and then you’ll be mad, but it will be too late.

By: clark smith

clark smith — Thu, 03 Mar 2005 20:41:28 +0000

My Christian faith is that Christ can redeem anyone.

So is mine. The possibility of redemption—however—does not negate the Lord’s mandate of punishment (Gen. 9:6.).

Is there any age at all for which you would oppose the death penalty?

The legal system should not concern itself with the age of the accused, but to three facts regarding the defendant: 1) certain identity as perpetrator, 2) plausible intent, and 3) egregiousness of conduct. When these things are ascertained, the punishment will fit the crime irrespective of the defendant's age.

I believe the death penalty simply represents a sick blood lust.

That’s way over the top. Sickness is properly represented as causeless harm perpetrated upon the innocent, not reasoned justice meted upon the guilty.

For me, capital punishment crosses from punishment to vengeance, which I see as reserved to God.

Vengeance is indeed reserved to God, but God has invested man with the rights and prerogatives of punishment. (Gen. 9:6 cited above, and Rom. 13:4.)

By: Joel Thomas

Joel Thomas — Wed, 02 Mar 2005 21:13:12 +0000

Locking someone up for life without the possibility of parole is turning the other cheek?

I’m not casual about murder. I lost one of my very dearest friends to rape/murder in 1980. I believe that justice can and often should be very harsh. For me, capital punishment crosses from punishment to vengeance, which I see as reserved to God. However, I understand that society disagrees with me and I have to live with that.

Also, as far as turning the other cheek, I believe that applies to indivudals, not society and that it is something of a hyperbole that Jesus spoke in and not intended to be taken absolutely literally. For that reason, I believe someone has the right to take someone else’s life in self-defense. Nevetheless, “turn the other cheek” speaks a valuable lesson about the reconciling possibilities of forgiveness. It is one of the reasons I’ve never seriously considered suing another person and probably wouldn’t except under the most extreme circumstances.

By: Xrlq

Xrlq — Wed, 02 Mar 2005 20:50:44 +0000

Of course there’s a substantial difference, but forgiveness ain’t it. To borrow your own example, there’s an even bigger difference between executing someone and telling them you’ll never speak to them again. All three, however, violate the turn-the-other-cheek model of criminal justice you appear to be advocating.

By: Joel Thomas

Joel Thomas — Wed, 02 Mar 2005 20:27:43 +0000

XRLQ,

You don’t see a substantial difference between incarcerating someone and executing them? Someone locked up without parole still has a chance at some life. A person executed has no possibility of life at all.

By: Xrlq

Xrlq — Wed, 02 Mar 2005 20:11:07 +0000

Joel T, I’m not sure that’s an argument against the penalty in particular, so much as an argument against punishment of any kind. How is it possible to forgive somebody and incarcerate them? Particularly if their crime is nonviolent and the risk of recidivism low (e.g., most white collar crimes)?

By: Joel Thomas

Joel Thomas — Wed, 02 Mar 2005 20:00:03 +0000

I don’t think it is possible to both forgive someone and to put them to death. That would be as if a friend wronged me and I told them I forgave them but in the next breath said I would never speak to them again.

I believe the death penalty simply represents a sick blood lust.

By: John R. Mayne

John R. Mayne — Wed, 02 Mar 2005 19:53:04 +0000

I would have been much happier had the court set up a rule for 16- and 17-year olds making it harder but not impossible to execute them; the instant case was such that the dude really asked to be fried. Ah, well.

On the religious front, I had a case with a defense attorney, who relayed the following from God through his client:

Attorney: You should take this deal. They have you on videotape, and they have a signed confession.

Client (20-year-old female): God has told me I will be acquitted.

Attorney: Then you need God as your lawyer, because while I represent you, you’re likely to be convicted.

–JRM