Argument presented for capital punishment
In spite of the consistent liberal political slant of the Herald Standard’s editorial writers, I appreciate much the paper’s policy of enabling a wide spectrum of opposing views to be expressed on its opinion page.
Usually if I am not in agreement with an article, I dismiss it as nothing more than a simple difference of opinion. Occasionally, however, if a writer’s reasoning is badly flawed or the conclusion excessively egregious, it becomes almost a necessity to respond. An opinion expressed by John Lucas in the Aug. 18 edition, arguing for the abolishment of capital punishment is an example.
It is not Lucas’s opposition to capital punishment on which I take exception. There are many thoughtful, fair-minded, and reasonable opponents to capital punishment. This article was of a different nature. It is his dismissive attitude, belittling, and allegation of hypocrisy toward an unnamed pastor who had merely expressed support for capital punishment. But even this unfair characterization is not the main problem. The main issue is this. His narrative on the manner (rather than the purpose) of the death of Jesus Christ is offered as the reason for the birth of Christianity.
Then, his incredibly baseless suggestion that if Jesus and not died such a “gruesome execution” but had lived “to a ripe old age” that there would not even be any Christianity is nothing more than the rants of an unlearned bigot. This is a blatant attempt to discredit or diminish the value of the historic Christian position that supports capital punishment.
Neither did Lucas stop with the above assertions. He opined that the family and loved ones of the victim of a planned, cold-blooded, senseless, and unrepentant murderer, and who desire only justice, are themselves, also, “murderers.” This is beyond callous. Where is the justice for the innocent victims of radical Muslim terrorists who glory in their shame and blood-lust? What of those who are slain in so-called “joy killings?” What of the infant little girl who was recently sexually assaulted by the boyfriend of her mother until she died? Where is her justice?
This is not to say that there is no place for reform in the implementation of capital punishment. Every possible safeguard in showing the indisputable guilt of the perpetrator should be diligently protected. In June of 1972, the Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty as it was currently imposed was “cruel and unusual” punishment. However, the court was sharply divided on the decision and, significantly, the ruling dealt only with the way capital punishment was dispensed. The ruling did not address the validity of the practice itself.
In fact, the decision made clear the opportunity for the individual states to reinstate capital punishment for specific crimes. These crimes included such things as an assassination of a president, treason, the murder of a police officer, or the murder of a person during the commission of a felony. It is wrong that still today, there is a disproportionate number of those who are poor or underprivileged and who are on death-row compared to the murderers who are wealthy, or socially or politically connected. But the inequality of enforcement and the lack of consistency in different jurisdictions do not negate the premise and value of the practice.
The purpose or validity of capital punishment was never intended to be found in the desire for personal human revenge. Neither was it ever meant to be a deterrent to murder or for the rehabilitation of other sorts of criminals. Instead, it demonstrates the sacredness of human life that is created in the image of God Himself. It was always referenced to divine justice. The most basic necessity for capital punishment is that it places within the purview of human government the responsibility to act for God in the dispensing of his justice and vengeance. Without this power and its consistent and equitable enforcement, society will have no remedy nor way to minimize the natural inclination toward human revenge and vigilantism. Regardless of claims to the contrary, a careful study of all the Bible including the New Testament, and the teaching of Christ, does not prohibit capital punishment.
There is not a single verse that mandates such restriction. It can be argued conversely, its prohibition would incite ever greater disrespect for the sacredness of life and thereby, increase the incidences of personal revenge.
William “Ed” Nicholson is a resident of Dunbar.