Oracle Online

The only good to come out of this is a renewed vigor in the campaign against capital punishment. Opposition to the death penalty has been growing in recent years, with many valid objections to its continuance. At least 122 death row inmates have been exonerated after establishing their innocence (not counting those proven innocent after their executions). The judicial system in many areas has been proven unjust, with minorities more likely to be prosecuted, convicted, and given harsher sentences than their white counterparts. The fact that innocents, especially minorities, are convicted and sentenced čand occasionally executedč should surprise few who are familiar with the court system.

This alone should be enough to ban the death penalty. However, its stated purposečas a deterrentčalso needs to be examined. I’ve discussed the issue with several police officers, including my brother (a Republican, no less!), and they all said it was not a deterrent, regardless of whether they supported it or not. Most murders are crimes of passion. Does anyone actually believe murderers calmly analyze the likelihood of ending up in the execution chamber?

So why execute them? Even if the individual being executed is guilty, it will not right the wrong, it will not solve anything, and it will not prevent future murders. I would rather see our efforts directed at something which might helpčeliminating poverty and improving the inadequate education of the many poor.

Why are so many people so eager to offer their support for execution? What does that say about our culture? In terms of numbers of citizens executed, the United States is at the top of the bracket, with only a few countries, like China and Saudi Arabia, executing near as many people. Think about what it means to execute as many people as a repressive, dictatorial regime like Saudi Arabia. Maybe it’s OK, because when we kill people, we kill them by running an electrical current through their body or inject them with lethal toxins instead of cutting their heads off. We kill humanely.

As compelling as all these arguments are, I notice that very few people are willing to make the most compelling argument of all: it is wrong to kill people. It seems we live in the Age of Rationality, in which any justification that cannot be quantified or given an economic value must be discarded. When I say killing is wrong, I can’t pull out a graph to prove it, or tell how many dollars it costs, or offer a survey or study that supports my argument.

That does not mean I should not say killing is wrong. I think it’s very important to argue against the death penalty. However, by shying away from a moral argument, it becomes a scientific, rational debate in which two sides must be weighed against each other in the court of logic. In the process, it is easy to forget that the things being argued about are actually people.

Some people claim moral arguments to advance the cause of capital punishment, even though they recognize that executing a human being is immoral, no matter who, no matter the reason. Those who oppose such state-sanctioned murder ought not to have to put together cold, scientific arguments to defend their position. Scientific rationality is important and has its place; however, can anyone argue against “it is wrong to kill”? It’s even in the Bible. “Thou shalt not kill” does not list exceptions. Hopefully citizens will recognize this, and work to defend the lives of those people guilty or innocent, who sit in prisons waiting for our government to kill them.