With Blindfold in Hand Columnist asks Death Penalty: “Any last requests?”
With Blindfold in Hand Columnist asks Death Penalty:
“Any last requests?”
A recent column in the Los Angeles Times Dec, 15th 2005, It’s not about Tookie, underscores the left’s desperate attempt to “execute” the death penalty, and conjures images of capital punishment going before a firing squad of liberal social zealots. I guess it’s a good thing for the rest of humanity that these gun-toters are such poor shots.
The writer of the editorial makes the point that “a civilized society doesn’t kill for retribution and should certainly not continue doing so when it’s become clear that the judicial system’s margin of error is unacceptably high.” In addition, the author states that California “should follow the example of Illinois, which imposed a moratorium on executions in 2000 in response to mounting evidence that the system is not foolproof.”
I certainly, agree with the first statement…in part, because it is only half right. It is true that a civilized society doesn’t kill for retribution. However, to use the imperfection of the system as justification for abolishing it is absurd.
Under this logic, any system which is imperfect should be abandoned. Does anybody out there know of a single man made system which is error free? It isn’t much of a stretch to see how applying this kind “logic” over the widest possible bandwidth leads to social anarchy. Since no man-governed system is without error, it follows that all systems for which man is functionary should be retroactively aborted, i.e. political systems, federal government, local government, law enforcement systems, etc.
The writer goes on to state that, “Capital punishment is always wrong because it is incompatible with our values.” This is a category mistake which reflects muddy thinking on the part of the author. Why? Because values are relative, while absolutes like right and wrong are not. I may value killing inconvenient babies, but my valuing it doesn’t make it legitimate.
But what exactly is the writer valuing, a perfect system? It would appear so, and I quite agree—a perfect system is the best of all possible systems. But it is unrealistic pie-in-the- sky fantasy to advocate the abolishment of capital punishment on such grounds, because to do so ignores not just the broad ramifications of such thinking, but denies the most fundamental assumption of life itself, reality.
Posted by Chad
Leave a Reply