Opinion

Addressing the assumed inconsistencies of pro-lifers views on capital punishment

On multiple occasions I’ve had well-meaning people who, upon realizing I’m pro-life, assume they know exactly where I must stand on all other societal issues. It’s not a matter of people guessing what my opinions might be. “Oh, you’re pro-life – do you think [fill in the blank]?” It’s more like once people find out I’m pro-life, they feel they must hold me to their ideals of how pro-lifers should reason. I addressed one of those topics in my last article on being pro-life but not a vegetarian. I was motivated to write that to those who question how I can protect fetuses but not fight for the rights of little chickens. In the comment section of the article a debate got started on a topic I will address later in this article.

Even though I like talking about such things, there are some assumptions or rather accusations that I usually don’t take time to address. The “you’re demonizing black women by discussing their abortion rates, so you’re a racist” is one I don’t bother fighting. I could explain myself, but if someone is foolish enough to think I’m a racist toward my own people, I won’t waste my time convincing her otherwise.

Over the years, I have met some sincere people who genuinely believe that my position on abortion should color my worldview in certain hues. I can understand that. We all expect certain things from people who profess to believe something. When we hear about a preacher having an affair, we stop and think, “Wait a minute, aren’t you supposed to be faithful?” We may not understand all the ins and outs of other people’s values, but we still use what we know to make our predictions. Unfortunately, this can get us in trouble, because people have complex views that are not easily put in neat little boxes.

One of the most common expectations of pro-lifers, and the one I’m addressing in this article, is the belief that we should also be against capital punishment. It’s obvious why people might think that all pro-lifers should hold that position. Simply put, the death penalty involves putting someone to death, as does the act of abortion.

I’m sure there are many pro-lifers who are adamantly against capital punishment. I’m just not one of them. I’ve listened to people explain why as a pro-lifer I should be against the death penalty. At times, I’ve even agreed with them. Yet when I really think about it, I admit that I think my pro-life views are consistent even though I’m not against capital punishment.

Before you label me a hypocrite, hear me out. After you’re done listening, then you can call me a hypocrite in the comment section. I’m pro-life because I believe that a fetus is valuable and should be protected. I am against abortion because I have seen its effect on men, women, and children. Even though Planned Parenthood says otherwise, having an abortion is not like a tooth being pulled. I’ve met lots of people, and to this day I can’t recall a woman ever mourning the tooth she had pulled ten years ago. Abortion is murder that’s packaged as just another woman’s choice. Abortion is morally wrong and destructive to society.

The statements I made about the unborn child’s worth are true to the inmate as well. A prisoner is valuable, no matter how corrupt his actions have been. So if an unborn child is as valuable as an adult prisoner, why am I not opposed to the death of both? For me, it comes down to my beliefs on justice.

I believe it’s unjust to take the life of a child without its consent. Babies are not only innocent, but voiceless. They are not able to make their own choices. They are vulnerable in every single way.

Most functioning adults are in a different situation. We have the ability to make choices. Our decisions, whether positive or negative, have consequences. If I decide to drive while drunk, I have made a poor choice. That poor choice may cost me the right to drive my car. If I endanger someone, I may even lose my freedom and end up in prison. Knowing the laws of the land may cause me to obey them. Yet if I disobey those laws and my rights are taken away because of my choices, that is just. I may object, but that is the law. The issue of the death penalty in my opinion is a matter more of consequences than of the value of a person.

I know that our justice system is far from perfect. That is gross understatement, actually. I know about the high rates of black men receiving the death penalty in states like Texas. I think we must look at issues of racial profiling and faulty witness testimonies. I don’t think any person should be sentenced to death without concrete evidence or with a single doubt that the person committed the crime. It’s a shame when a man is sentenced to death because he looks like someone he isn’t. That infuriates me. I like Rick Perry, but I don’t like everything that’s happened in his state.

When it comes to the death penalty, my heart is always bent toward mercy and second chances. I personally think a lifelong prison sentence is a better consequence than the death penalty. If I were judge and jury in every case, I honestly doubt that I would ever sentence someone to death. Yet just because I wouldn’t condemn a man to death, that doesn’t mean there aren’t times when our society should. I could barely give someone a traffic ticket without feeling some level of guilt. That’s why I’m not a cop. I have compassion toward others and want the best for them. I also understand there are cases where the guilty party has confessed, the facts are clear, and capital punishment is believed to be the best ruling. I don’t think I have to object to that because of my pro-life views.

I find it interesting that I’ve never heard an argument or objections against Third Reich officers and Nazi war criminals receiving capital punishment after WWII ended. I wonder if people who accuse pro-lifers of being hypocritical on this issue would truly object to a radical dictator or mass murderer like Hitler being executed for his crimes. If they wouldn’t, it causes me to wonder if the issue is truly about the taking of a life or people’s varying views on guilt and punishment.

I also ponder the meaning behind Genesis Chapter 9:5-6.

Surely I will require your lifeblood; from every beast I will require it. And from every man, from every man’s brother I will require the life of man. Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man his blood shall be shed, for God made man in his own image.

From my reading, I see that God established a covenant with Noah and told him that whoever shed the blood of men would have as a punishment his blood shed. Some believe that this scripture supports the death penalty. I wouldn’t go as far as to say that, but it is something worth researching and studying.

My views on this topic are still developing. My heart’s wish would be for every criminal to be given the help he needs to bring about some positive change in his life – even if it takes place only in the enclosed walls of his cell. In a perfect world, that could happen. In our imperfect nation, people will suffer the loss of their lives for the crimes they’ve committed. Tragically, some will continue to die for crimes they didn’t commit. We can all agree that that should never happen. There are countless areas in our society that call for reform, and this is surely one of them. Yet as a pro-lifer, I refuse to believe that capital punishment is the same issue as abortion or feel pressured to speak against it lest I be called a hypocrite.

Live Action on Facebook
  • Steve Farrell

    Piety, moralism, and misogyny are a terrible mixture.

    • Vertebrae8

      True. Hedonism, nihilism, and feminism are so much better.

      • Steve Farrell

        Oh, Vertebrae8 just reminded me. Overcompensation isn’t pretty either.

        • Vertebrae8

          Overcompensation for what?

          • Steve Farrell

            The usual. Just my assumption.

          • Vertebrae8

            Ok. You’re thinking about my penis over there. You’re wondering How big my penis is. In public.

            Can someone help me figure out how to respond?

          • Steve Farrell

            I’m not even wondering. It’s pretty obvious.

          • Detroiter327

            Racism + Religious Discrimination + Penis Jokes = Weird pro life comments.

          • Allan Daniel

            Why are you such a fool?

  • http://twitter.com/Astraspider Astraspider

    Catholicism’s influence in America gets used as a buttress in arguments here frequently (from abortion to contraception). So I’ll just remind everyone what the Vatican’s stance is: the death penalty “is not only a refusal of the right to life, but it is an affront to human dignity”. The Holy See sees that the death penalty carries “numerous risks,” including the danger of punishing innocent people, and that capital punishment promotes “violent forms of revenge rather than a true sense of social justice.”

    http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/vatican-says-death-penalty-affront-human-dignity

    • Vertebrae8

      Yet the Catholics pioneered just warfare.

  • Vertebrae8

    I am for the death penalty because I am for just warfare. I am not a pacifist. Many Christians think I am monstrous because I am the guy who writes the tickets and shoots the jihadists. This author, Christina, hides behind me and my brothers, but at least she doesn’t detest me for being honest about what I do. I kill our enemies, am sworn to do so, foreign or domestic, according to due process.

    Let’s ask Christina, and folks like her, what she’d like me to do with abortionists once abortion becomes illegal and I catch them killing people.

    • Mitch Behna

      I’m mostly against the death penalty, since we have more security and people on death row that are innocent do get killed. But as a conservative, I respect your opinion and know where you’re coming from

  • lada2011

    Great article! It is refreshing to see some express this opinion. It is very possible to be pro-life and not opposed to the death penalty.

  • http://twitter.com/benjaminsumner Ben Sumner

    I often think of the death penalty as putting a rabid pit bull to sleep. I have a hard time fighting for the life of someone who has killed and would continue to kill. This isn’t to say there aren’t exceptions, but, for instance, a convicted unrepentant child rapist and killer won’t get my support.

  • Mitch Behna

    I enjoy this topic. The death penalty and abortion are 2 different things. yes, nowadays we don’t need it as much, if at all, because of prisons and more security. And i’m mostly against it, but i’m so tired of people saying they’re the same thing. They’re not! Bobby Jindal is a great example. He has a strong support for the death penalty, since he is tough on crime, but he’s still pro life since he is fully against abortion, euthanasia, and embryonic stem cell research. he’s one of my picks for 2016.

    • http://twitter.com/Astraspider Astraspider

      Your post reveals exactly what the calculations are in the “political world”. The conservative coalition is a messy alliance of business interests, religious voters, and “safety” hawks, whether domestic or international. Jindal isn’t a maker of that opinion, he’s a follower, a cobbler of interest groups. Just like you, apparently. You’ve been taught that your tribe subscribes to a cobbled together set of opinions on things like, oh, say, abortion on the one hand and crime on the other.

      And, viola! Pro-life inconsistency is born. Too bad we can’t abort it.

      • Mitch Behna

        no my friend, its your liberal agenda with Obama and his croanies that are all corrupt. Quit with the typical talking points from obama. its giving me a headache just reading

        • http://twitter.com/Astraspider Astraspider

          “typical talking points from obama”

          Yeah, right. If Obama talked like me, he wouldn’t get elected as Chicago dog catcher. But, really, is this what you do when faced with complex push-back? Plug your ears and scream that it’s all MSNBC’s fault?

          • Mitch Behna

            I don’t plug my ears and I don’t scream because that’s what whiny liberals do

  • Basset_Hound

    Christina, I’m not going to call you ANYTHING in the comments section for such a well written, thoughtful article.

  • http://www.facebook.com/john.doey.73700 John Doey

    Whatever! I’ll say it right now, I really wanted to vote Republican as Obama’s economic policies stink and I basically hold a lot of conservative views but the pro-life movement and evangelicals made that totally impossible for me as I am fine with gay marriage, legalizing drugs, and abortion.

    • http://twitter.com/Two_of_Five Amie Holladay

      So basically what you’re saying is that you decided that the economic(and thus overall) health of an entire nation was less important than your opinions on people’s lifestyle choices? Sorry, feel free to keep posting but you’ve just admitted to being completely irrelevant and you’ll have to pardon us all for skipping right ahead when we see your name.

    • Mitch Behna

      Then you’re more of a libertarian.

    • John

      Then you voted appropriately – you will reap what you sowed – sorry you cannot overcome your personal bad behavior to vote in your own economic interest.

  • Ward Ricker

    As long as you call yourself “pro-life” those on the other side will always find some reason to say that you’re not really so. Either you support the death penalty, or have the wrong position on gun control or assisted suicide, or you eat meat, or… something. Of course, it is the same for “pro-choicers”. Are they really “pro-choice” if they don’t believe we can choose to rob a bank, dump our hazardous wastes where we “choose”, drive at any rate of speed we “choose”, etc.? Either side of the argument is just as looney. Personally, I try to avoid the term “pro-life” and simply describe myself as “anti-abortion”. It may have a more negative sound to it, but no one will ever try to argue I am not anti-abortion. That leaves them to argue about the real issue at hand.

  • dudleysharp

    The death penalty as pro life

    First, the “pro life” term was, originally, identified with the anti
    abortion movement, which still seems the most appropriate context.

    Secondly, in the context of the facts, yes, of course you can be pro life
    and pro death penalty. There is no contradiction.

    Based upon biblical and theological teachings, one can, reasonably and
    responsibly, find that an anti death penalty view is not pro life.

    All sanctions are given because we value what is being taken away.

    Whether it be fines, freedom or lives, in every case we take things away,
    as legal sanction, it is because we value that which is taken away.

    How can it be a sanction, if we do not value that which is taken away? It
    can’t.

    In addition, more innocent lives are saved when we use the death penalty,
    thereby a pro life benefit.

    There is the well known Genesis passage, reviewed below, wherein the death
    penalty is based upon life being sacred. Genesis is for all peoples and all
    times.

    In addition, there is Numbers 35:31 which states that there can be no
    reduction in sentence for murder, that the murderer must be executed. All other
    crimes are subject to reduced sentences.

    The good thief on the cross stated the two thieves were being justly
    executed for their crimes. Jesus did not reply “you should not be executed”. His
    reply was that the good thief would attain eternal salvation. The concern seems
    not the manner of our earthly deaths, but our state of redemption and salvation
    at the time of our deaths – the concern for eternal life.

    The moral and religious arguments, in support of the death penalty, all
    have a foundation in respecting innocent life, therefore, when it is wrongly
    taken away, the highest form of sanction is provided.

    As in:

    Genesis 9:5-6: “For your lifeblood I will surely require a reckoning….
    Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for God made man
    in his own image.”

    Chapter V:The Sanctity of Life, “Principles of Conduct: Aspects of Biblical
    Ethics” By John Murray, 1991 (first published 1957) by Wm. B. Eerdmans http://tiny.cc/4SFBY

    “Moral/ethical Death Penalty Support: Christian and secular Scholars”
    http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/07/death-penalty-support-modern-catholic.html

    “Killing Equals Killing: The Amoral Confusion of Death Penalty
    Opponents”
    http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/02/01/murder-and-execution–very-distinct-moral-differences–new-mexico.aspx

    “The Death Penalty: Neither Hatred nor Revenge”
    http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/20/the-death-penalty-neither-hatred-nor-revenge.aspx

    “The Death Penalty: Not a Human Rights Violation”
    http://homicidesurvivors.com/2006/03/20/the-death-penalty-not-a-human-rights-violation.aspx

    In at least three ways, innocents are more protected with the death
    penalty, than with lesser sanctions. Another pro life consideration.

    THE DEATH PENALTY: SAVING MORE INNOCENT LIVES

    Of all endeavors that put innocents at risk, is there one with a better
    record of sparing innocent lives than the US death penalty? Unlikely.

    1) The Death Penalty: Saving More Innocent Lives
    http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/03/death-penalty-saving-more-innocent.html

    2) Innocents More At Risk Without Death Penalty
    http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/03/innocents-more-at-risk-without-death.html

  • dudleysharp

    Mercy & Justice – Sanction & the Death Penalty
    compiled by
    Dudley Sharp

    1) Saint Augustine: ” . . . inflicting capital punishment .. . protects those who are undergoing capital punishment from the harm they may suffer . . . through increased sinning which might continue if their life went on.” (On the Lord’s Sermon, 1.20.63-64.)

    2) Saint Thomas Aquinas: . . . the death inflicted by the judge profits the sinner, if he be converted, unto the expiation of his crime; and, if he be not converted, it profits so as to put an end to the sin, because the sinner is thus deprived of the power to sin anymore.” Summa Theologica, II-II, 25, 6, 2

    as with:

    3) Quaker biblical scholar Dr. Gervas A. Carey:
    “. . . a secondary measure of the love of God may be said to appear. For capital
    punishment provides the murderer with incentive to repentance which the ordinary
    man does not have, that is a definite date on which he is to meet his God. It is
    as if God thus providentially granted him a special inducement to repentance out
    of consideration of the enormity of his crime . . . the law grants to the
    condemned an opportunity which he did not grant to his victim, the opportunity
    to prepare to meet his God. Even divine justice here may be said to be tempered
    with mercy.” synopsis: “A Bible Study”, from Essays on the Death Penalty, T.
    Robert Ingram, ed., St. Thomas Press, Houston, 1963, 1992. Dr. Carey was a
    Professor of Bible and past President of George Fox College.

    4) Romano Amerio, a faithful Catholic Vatican insider, scholar, professor at the Academy of Lugano, consultant to the Preparatory Commission of Vatican II, and a peritus (expert theologian) at the Council.

    “The most irreligious aspect of this argument against capital punishment is
    that it denies its expiatory value which, from a religious point of view, is of
    the highest importance because it can include a final consent to give up the
    greatest of all worldly goods.”

    “This fits exactly with St. Thomas’s opinion that as well as canceling out
    any debt that the criminal owes to civil society, capital punishment can cancel
    all punishment due in the life to come. His thought is . . . Summa, ‘Even death
    inflicted as a punishment for crimes takes away the whole punishment due for
    those crimes in the next life, or a least part of that punishment, according to
    the quantities of guilt, resignation and contrition; but a natural death does
    not.’ ”

    “The moral importance of wanting to make expiation also explains the
    indefatigable efforts of the Confraternity of St. John the Baptist Beheaded, the
    members of which used to accompany men to their deaths, all the while
    suggesting, begging and providing help to get them to repent and accept their
    deaths, so ensuring that they would die in the grace of God, as the saying
    went.”

    Some opposing capital punishment “. . . go on to assert that a life should
    not be ended because that would remove the possibility of making expiation, is
    to ignore the great truth that capital punishment is itself expiatory. In a
    humanistic religion expiation would of course be primarily the converting of a
    man to other men. On that view, time is needed to effect a reformation, and the
    time available should not be shortened. In God’s religion, on the other hand,
    expiation is primarily a recognition of the divine majesty and lordship, which
    can be and should be recognized at every moment, in accordance with the
    principle of the concentration of one’s moral life.”

    Some death penalty opponents “deny the expiatory value of death; death
    which has the highest expiatory value possible among natural things, precisely
    because life is the highest good among the relative goods of this world; and it
    is by consenting to sacrifice that life, that the fullest expiation can be made.
    And again, the expiation that the innocent Christ made for the sins of mankind
    was itself effected through his being condemned to death.”

    “Amerio on capital punishment “, Chapter XXVI, 187. The death penalty, from
    the book Iota Unum, May 25, 2007 ,
    http://www.domid.blogspot.com/2007/05/amerio-on-capital-punishment.html

    5) The Catechism of The Roman Catholic Church (2005) states: “The primary
    scope of the penalty is to redress the disorder caused by the offense.” “When
    his punishment is voluntarily accepted by the offender, it takes on the value of
    expiation.” 2266

    This is a specific reference to justice, just retribution, just deserts and
    the like, all of which redress the disorder.

    We must first recognize the guilt/sin/crime/disorder of the aggressor and
    hold them accountable for it by way of penalty, meaning the penalty should be
    just and appropriate for the guilt/sin/crime/disorder and should represent
    justice/just retribution/just deserts and their like which “redress the disorder
    caused by the offence” or to correct an imbalance, as defined within the example
    of 2260:

    “For your lifeblood I will surely require a reckoning…. Whoever sheds the
    blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for God made man in his own
    image.” “This teaching remains necessary for all time.”

    as with:

    6) Quaker biblical scholar Dr. Gervas A. Carey: ” . . .
    the decree of Genesis 9:5-6 is equally enduring and cannot be separated from the
    other pledges and instructions of its immediate context, Genesis 8:20-9:17; . .
    . that is true unless specific Biblical authority can be cited for the deletion,
    of which there appears to be none. It seems strange that any opponents of
    capital punishment who professes to recognize the authority of the Bible either
    overlook or disregard the divine decree in this covenant with Noah; . . .
    capital punishment should be recognized . . . as the divinely instituted penalty
    for murder; The basis of this decree . . . is as enduring as God; . . . murder
    not only deprives a man of a portion of his earthly life . . . it is a further
    sin against him as a creature made in the image of God and against God Himself
    whose image the murderer does not respect.” “A Bible Study” (p. 111-113) Essays
    on the Death Penalty, T. Robert Ingram, ed., St. Thomas Press, Houston, 1963,
    1992.

    7) G. K. Chesterton : Children are innocent and love justice, while
    most adults are wicked and prefer mercy.” http://www.online-literature.com/chesterton/

    8)
    C. S. Lewis: “Some enlightened people would like to banish all conceptions of
    retribution or desert from their theory of punishment and place its value wholly
    in the deterrence of others or the reform of the criminal himself. They do not
    see that by so doing they render all punishment unjust. What can be more immoral
    than to inflict suffering on me for the sake of deterring others if I do not
    deserve it? And if I do deserve it, you are admitting the claims of retribution.
    ” “The Complete C.S. Lewis”, Signature Classics, The Problem of Pain, P407,
    Harper Collins, 2002

    9) Reconciliation has to be built with full recognition and accountability for the wrong. –Martha Kilpatrick

    10) George MacDonald: God will give absolute justice, which is the only good thing.
    He will spare nothing to bring his children back to himself, their sole
    well-being, whether he achieve it here—or there. http://www.george-macdonald.com/

    11) William Law : “To say, therefore, as some have said, if God is all love toward
    fallen man, how can he threaten or chastise sinners is no better that saying, if
    God is all goodness in Himself and toward man, how can He do that in and to man
    which is for his good? As absurd is to say, if the able physician is all love,
    goodness and good will toward his patients, how can he blister, purge, or
    scarify them, how can he order one to be trepanned and another to have a limb
    cut off? Nay, so absurd is this reasoning that if it could be proved that God
    had no chastisement for sinners, the very want of their chastisement would be
    the greatest of all proofs that God was not all love and goodness toward
    man.”

    “And, therefore, the pure, mere love of God is that alone from
    which sinners are justly to expect that no sin will pass unpunished, but that
    His love will visit them with every calamity and distress that can help to break
    and purify the bestial heart of man and awaken in him true repentance and
    conversion to God. It is love alone in the holy Deity that will allow no peace
    to the wicked, nor ever cease its judgments till ever sinner is forced to
    confess that it is good for him that he has been in trouble, and thankfully own
    that not the wrath but the love of God has plucked out that right eye, cut off
    that right band, which he ought to have done but would not do for himself and
    his own salvation.” A Serious Call to a Devout and Holy Life, http://www.answers.com/topic/william-law

    12) Jesus: Now one of the criminals hanging there reviled Jesus, saying, “Are you
    not the Messiah? Save yourself and us.” The other, however, rebuking him, said
    in reply, “Have you no fear of God, for you are subject to the same
    condemnation? And indeed, we have been condemned justly, for the sentence we
    received corresponds to our crimes, but this man has done nothing criminal.”
    Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” (Jesus)
    replied to him, “Amen, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”
    Luke 23: 39-43

    Mercy, salvation and redemption will not be measured by
    the method of our earthly death , but by our state of grace in the context of
    the eternal.

  • Allan Daniel

    Oh my gosh, how difficult is it to understand the difference between innocence and guilt? Society ought to punish the guilty as God will punish them when he sorts things out in the end. But God does not expect us to wait for his justice. He gave lawful governing bodies the right and duty to punish. A parent has the right to refuse to defend his or her self, but not the right to not defend his or her child. We owe the innocent no punishment because they are not guilt of anything. When we punish the innocent we become guilty. That really isn’t difficult to understand. People who refuse to make the connections appear to be doing it for some misguided reason that is surely not Biblical.

  • David Wendell

    Great article ! As for the term “pro-choice”, do I get to choose not to
    contribute part of my taxes to fund abortions ? My “choice” is to either
    pay all of my taxes OR pay only the portion of taxes that do not help fund abortions with the result of having my house taken away from me, or receiving a fine or, going to prison.
    “Pro-choice” – what a hypocritical term !! Thanks for your intelligent article Christina Martin.

    • Steve Farrell

      It sucks for individuals, David, but take comfort in the fact that religious organizations don’t have to pay a red cent for anyone’s family planning, education, or public welfare except people willing to contribute to the churches’ upkeep. Render unto Caesar is for the rest of us, apparently.

  • Michael Stone

    Ms. Martin, thank you for a thoughtful blog post on capital punishment.

    In your post, you write: “I’m pro-life because I believe that a fetus is valuable and should be protected.”

    Consider the analogy with capital punishment. Do those on death row have value? Most people who commit violent crimes do so because they are full of anger and don’t know how to positively process that fury. They commit violence when under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Once sober, most are not particulary dangerous. There are very few violent sociopaths in our prisons.

    From a biblical perspective, consider murders that God chose to be great leaders of their people — Moses, King David, and Paul (who confessed in Acts that he was an accessory to murder of Christians).

    I believe in redemption, thus I believe that those sentenced to die have great potential for good if given the chance.

    You also wrote: “I am against abortion because I have seen its effect on men, women, and children.”

    How do you think people get executed? There are prosecutors who try them, attorneys who defend them, judges who oversee their trials, jurors who sentence them to die, guards who oversee them, and executioners who kill them.

    Have you ever talked to anyone involved in legal killing? It can exact a terrible price.

    Here are a few examples of wardens & executioners who are haunted by their lethal actions on behalf of society:

    Former executioners say it’s time to kill the death penalty
    http://www.bakersfieldnow.com/news/local/Former-executioners-say-its-time-to-kill-the-death-penalty-175735821.html

    Interview with an Executioner

    Interview with Dr. Allen Ault [former warden & director of corrections] on the Death Penalty

    If you are honest & consistent with your moral reasoning, I think you will conclude that the death penalty is just as wrong as abortion.

    Best wishes,
    Michael Stone
    michael@ncadp.org

    • John

      The death penalty is a serious step for society – but paying for an unrepentant murderer to live a life of ease – even in confinement – is a punishment of society. I would that all men would live peaceably with all others; but we do not do that.

      If we had ‘hard’ labor in prison, making the prisoner ‘earn’ his keep, perhaps there would be an argument for life in prison versus the death penalty – but we cannot even do that.

      I have a brother who murdered another man. I have another brother who was murdered by another man. Two totally separate and unrelated situations. The murderer of my brother received 40 years in prison – he didn’t even have a chance of the death penalty for a premeditated willful act that he is unrepentant of even today, in prison. When he gets out, he’ll be that much smarter from his first effort so that in killing the next person, perhaps he can get away with even less, or no punishment . . . and it’s people like yourself that permit that kind of criminal.

      My murderous brother died before he ever went to trial – the second victim of his own lethal hands. There are things worse than death – and there is life after death. We need to listen to the one who knows what eternal life is about, and heed what he says rather than rationalizing out our own ‘wisdom’. Otherwise we bear the consequences of failing to use that wisdom – and are a worse society for it.

      Paul’s murder was legal – just wrong, much like abortion today. Paul no doubt had leadership qualities and his writings and wisdom are invaluable – per inspiration of the Holy Ghost . . . but notice that he spent much of his life in jail, ultimately losing his life to an executioner.

      Moses killed a slave-driver – pretty justifiable by most since he was a royal (Egyptian) leader at the time too – he was making a statement for the Jewish people – though murder was too far to go even for royalty. He spent 40 years on the back side of the desert himself – not too much different than a legitimate prison.

      David was already a ruler. He was not ‘promoted’ after the fact, nor was he rewarded in any way. In fact, he did lose his kingdom as a direct result of this sin – and lost many of his children too (fortunately he got the kingdom back). Ask any murderer if they would rather lose their life, or the life of one of their children . . . David lost the first born of Bathsheba, he lost Amnon (who was foolish in his sex life too), he lost Absalom, he had a daughter raped – and when he was about to die, David’s one son attempted to wrest away the Kingdom from the chosen son – - – and ultimately that son died too . . . pretty awful to lose four children for your wickedness. Not to mention the loss of respect from his men – the shame to God’s name every time this is mentioned. I know he was regretful to his death for that foolish choice . . . but it’s a fitting discussion for this forum because MOST of the abortion being done today is about trying to avoid the consequences of sinful acts – and so was David’s murder . . . we don’t advocate the death penalty for David or for the mother’s who murder their children – however, for those who willfully murder another person . . . there does need to be the threat of the death penalty.

      So I am considering the Biblical examples you mention and not seeing a reason for keeping murderers away from the death penalty.

      Thank God He is merciful to us all.

  • Amy

    Despite all the nasty comments below, I agree with you (or, at the least, I completely understand what you mean and think. I also think you’re very gracious to nasty commentators). I have a very hard time wanting grace for those who have killed a lot of people for no justifiable reason (I would have trouble having compassion for Hitler but would find compassion for a soldier who killed to defend innocents), but I still want people to recieve second chances. It is unjust that laws allow for racial profiling, and you stated that you know that, so we’re in agreement there.

    I’m still figuring out what I think about the death sentence, but I truly believe that not punishing those who harm others causes harm to any innocent parties involved (like being “kind” to a rapist and letting him out of jail means he just has more chance to rape other innocent girls). Maybe it’s not “loving” to give them a life sentence or whatever, but innocent people must be protected. I’m still figuring out the actual death sentence aspect, though… Tricky subject. Either way, I appreciate how you express yourself: very clear and calm—not trying to pick a fight with people just because you can. Right on! :)

  • Pingback: Abortion and Capital Punishment: A Modest Proposal

  • Famille Lutherienne

    I am pro-life and against capital punishment. Every human being, from conception, is already a murderer in his heart and deserves death. But God doesn’t give us what we deserve. God Himself took the penalty for our sins so that we could live and, in turn, show mercy to our fellow man.

  • Pingback: Finding relief in earthly justice | International Youth Coalition