Quote:
Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars
Are you trying to justify execution by somehow asserting that *not* executing them would be morally wrong?
|
Yes. He is. The murderer took an
innocent life from the societal whole and society owes a duty to its remaining citizens.
As a society, we place a paramount value on the protection of innocent life. We believe, it is fundamental and necessary to our existence as a society and to those fundamental truths articulated in our founding documents: "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness".
When someone demonstrates that they are willing to disregard/attack the core beliefs of our society, it is our duty, as a society, to make them pay the paramount penalty in order to
demonstrate the value we as a society place on
innocent life. Permitting a guilty murderer to live devalues the innocent life wrongly taken and, some would say, condones the taking of innocent life.
Again, is compassion and forgiveness an element of "justice", if so, who decides when compassion is appropriate? Which is more important - condoning societal compassion to a murderer or making a clear and consistent statement that, in our society, innocent life is our most treasured possesion?