People are people. People are not monsters. People can do evil things, very evil–but they remain human.
We ignore that at our peril.
I am indeed pro-choice, although I justify my position mostly as a matter of convenience.
Similarly, I consider it convenient for society to execute vicious murderers.
You still lost me on the monster thing, since the above opinion does not appear to be premised on monsterhood.
I’d also point out that, as a matter of convience, it probably makes sense to execute the homeless.
I was a little surprised to see that three members of the US Sup Ct did not participate in the decision at that court because they were acquainted with the victims family, until I read that the victims’ son was a federal judge. This called up a recent study of capital cases in Nebraska, which tends to be lilly white and some what Germanic as well. That study seems to conclude that whether or not a death sentence is imposed in Nebraska has more to do with the relative social status of defendant and victim than with race. I can’t help but wonder if the discrepancy between the social standing of a 17-year-old outlaw (I think that a fair characterization) and the parents of a federal judge may have quite a bit to do with the sentence and with the volume of the outcry against the stay order. On the other hand, that the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, not known as a bastion of bleeding hearts, saw fit to order a stay is a fair indication that there is something fishy about the case.
My own judgement is that there are some people out there that the government may properly judicially murder for the safety of the community. However, it is also my judgement that those dangerous people are the ones who have demonstrated that they cannot be safely kept in prison by killing as prisoners or during the course of an escape from prison.
It also seems to me that the way capital sentences are now carried out effectively means that any educational value they might have for others who might do similar things is lost. In Texas after all, the deed is done in a clinical setting as a phony medical procedure observed by government officials and grieving or vengeful relatives. How can that serve as a deterrent? It is mere vengeance. If capital punishment advocates want a deterrent effect, they should argue for a public execution in the Arab or Chinese style with the criminal’s relatives dragging the body off to the town landfill in one or two pieces.
Good point. Convenience doesn’t really work.
And yet, there are entities that have some characteristics of humans, but IMHO aren’t entitled to have their lives protected, e.g.:
– blastocysts
– embryos
– murderers
– brain-dead people on life support
– animals
On the other hand I think society has an obligation to protect the lives of:
– homeless people
– Anzheimer’s Disease sufferers
– babies
– Down’s syndrome sufferers
– felons who aren’t murderers
I regret that I cannot enunciate a principled philosophical justification for my beliefs.
In what ways are murderers not human?
The Yiddish word, “mensch,” has two meanings. It (roughly) means “person” and it means “person who behaves properly.” (Language experts – feel free to correct or amplify my definitions.)
A murderer is a “mensch” in only one of these senses.
Put another way: Someone who doesn’t accept a social contract shouldn’t be entitled to be a full-fledged member of that society.
Maybe these aren’t the same as “human,” but hopefully they show where I’m coming from.
**
Would you prefer the word felon be used? Because a felon is someone we specifically put into another category for the purpose of defining certain human rights out of existence. The right to privacy, freedom, and sometimes even life.
**
Nice package deal. You’re trying to equate the view of jews as monsters as being on the same level as viewing rapist and murderers as monsters. That just doesn’t fly in my book. There are some human beings who are so evil that monster is a valid way to describe them.
**
I agree.
Marc
I think I see what you’re saying, December. But I simply feel that to dismiss any human being as a monster is to hide form the fact that the Stalins, the Eichmanns, the Dahmers of the world ARE human. They is us.
A monster is just someone who inspires horror or disgust. I recognize that no matter how evil a person is he is still a person. But that doesn’t make him any less of a monster.
Marc
MGibson: *Would you prefer the word felon be used [instead of “monster”]? Because a felon is someone we specifically put into another category for the purpose of defining certain human rights out of existence. The right to privacy, freedom, and sometimes even life. *
Yes I would, because “felon” simply refers to a subcategory of human beings. What december’s initial post on the subject suggested is that perhaps we should regard certain criminals as “monsters” instead of human beings.
Nice package deal. You’re trying to equate the view of jews as monsters as being on the same level as viewing rapist and murderers as monsters.
No, I was not. I simply brought up that point as a cautionary example of the potential disadvantages of thinking of other human beings as “monsters”, and I specifically distinguished between applying such designations on the basis of race or religion and applying them on the basis of deliberate criminal activity.
*There are some human beings who are so evil that monster is a valid way to describe them. *
You’re welcome to your opinion, but as we seem to be in agreement that such designations don’t belong in criminal law, I don’t have any comment to make on it.
Yes, I agree this is the nub of our debate. My POV is that, e.g., John William King, Shawn Berry, and Lawrence Russell Brewer (killers of James Byrd) is NOT us. Yes, they look like us, but I consider that there’s a fundamental moral difference.
Ahh, guys, there’s a difference between abortion and the death penalty. A fetus has caused harm to no person. A murderer knowingly caused grievous harm to one or more other people. How can it make sense that those who prey upon society and kill, are themselves free from that same punishment? I mean, it just doesn’t fly. Hasn’t the murderer in effect chosen his own punishment?