The supreme court had already ruled that the death penalty could only be applied to a murderer, not a rapist or other assailant. However, 5 different states still allowed the death penalty to be applied to child rapists. This was recently shot down by the supreme court.
As it should be. People who abuse children, are what I call a damned cow; as opposed to a sacred cow. When their existence is brought up, anyone close enough to hear is expected to unleash all of their fury on them, without being tempered by logic. In a roundabout manner, I often find myself defending child abusers, only because I push for the demystification of all cows.
The supreme courts decision was logical and just. If the decision were the opposite, it would be an insult to adult rape victims, by belittling their victimhood. Child rapists would be sentenced to death, rapists of females would be sentenced to prison, and rapists of males—typically within prison— would continue to go unprosecuted. Why should the predators they faced receive a lesser punishment than the predators of children?
Perpetrators of the same crime need to be punished equally, regardless of who they victimized. Otherwise we are holding different standards to different segments of the population, which is a violation of equal rights. The 2 sensible positions on this topic are that all rapists should be subject to the death penalty, or no rapists. Anything in-between is simple prejudice.
POST SCRIPT: I don’t support the death penalty for anyone, just talking semantics here.
3 comments:
Would you support the death penalty if you were raped today?
If you had the choice to be raped, or kill, what would you choose?
If a rapist rapes your daughter then rapes your wife. After raping you, only to gloat and show no apparent regret. Would you support the death penalty?
I mean, to make a statement like you don't support the death penalty, you have to be pretty sure about it. Theres no ifs, ands or buts.. because you try discussing this topic with someone who this happens to and your argument falls of deaf ears.
logic is one thing, but being human is another. Im afraid of that flawed human inside of me. If humans were logical...I'd be a communist. We'd all be communists and the world would be perfect. We can only aspire for that.
i think when we as a people decide to stop raping, we would also simultaneously stop killing.
Not vice versa..
Maybe you're right though, maybe the first step is abolishing the death penalty. But are we developed enough as a human race to stop killing? Even if Im incapable of killing, (which for the record i believe i am, even for my own self preservation). i doubt the entire race is such.
the US Justice system is carrying out the murder. Murder is wrong no matter who perpetrates it. The death penalty in a lot of ways is just perpetuating "so called evil". In fact thats how our justice system currently works. Its all about Judeo-Christian revenge. Its like how Christian parents raise their children...by hitting.
Drive drunk?- hit 'em in the wallet.
Cause a public disturbance?- hit 'em in the ego, in court.
molest a little girl?- hit 'em in the ass in prison.
kill someone?- hit em in the arm with a needle.
(i know you know this cobe, im just bitching because i used to be really against the death penalty completely but now im stuck, also keep in mind i am too speaking semantics)
But what if that was taken out of the equation?
What if the murder was not a murder perpetrated by the justice system but rather an optional suicide if convicted..
(read further)
In fact, i feel its much more logical in some cases to put someone to death rather than you taking your own revenge. At least the rapist has a chance of dodging the death penalty in the court of law. If you were left to your own devices in the matter, he would'nt..If he did'nt kill you, you, being a human, would for all intensive purposes instinctively wanna kill him..
Are you absolutely positive you could combat that urge?
Also, I think the death penalty is often times favorable to jailtime, and certainly more humane. The problem is they need to allow it to be a suicide and not an execution.
And heres how:
Steps for a humane execution:
-Lock detainee/murderer/rapist in a room willingly, after meeting with the families of the victims.
-Give subject a shiny revolver and a near lethal dose of LSD 25 to ingest and then hand them a manilla folder containing pictures of their victims.
wait an hour...
and voila!
98 percent "success" rate.. And the 2 percent that fuck it all up. Well...they go home a changed person, hopefully.
honestly I think you're presenting overly emotional arguments. here is my reasoning for being against the (governmental) death penalty
-the legal system ought to be better than what peoples urges are, not commensurate with them. What I would to to a rapist or murder of me or mine is immaterial; because the laws job is to be just, fair, and humane. The death penalty turns out in many cases to be none of those things
-There are certain realities to the institution of state sponsored death. If we are sentencing someone to death, we have to be 100% they are guilty. Can we ever be that sure? I don't think so. Because we can never be perfect, an innocent person will always die, and:
-The death penalty paradox presents itself. If even one innocent person dies on death row, than the executioner(s)(meaning the hangman, the judge, the jury, the arresting officer, and all taxpayers!) are themselves guilty of murder, and ought to be executed as well.
The latter part is really all it takes for me. Will an innocent person die as a result of the death penalty ? Yes? Than it is unjust.
-Your def. correct in saying the justice system in no way should cater to human emotions.
-Even with something like DNA evidence the ability to prove a person's absolute guilt without a shadow of a doubt is impossible in every instance.
-So in the end, Im gonna have to agree with you.
-The suicide thing was a joke. And in retrospect seems like a scene from Clockwork Orange more than anything.
-I didn't properly put into consideration the possibility of innocence. i was just assuming the convicted person to be guilty. Which as you pointed out, is'nt always the case.
Post a Comment