Never will the
time be more opportune than now for serious reflection
and discussion of capital punishment and Christian
ethics. The United States of America now holds
the dubious distinction of being the world's leader
in the area of homicides.
General interest in the death penalty has never
been greater than it is today as we witness the
vicious killings of individuals by fellow human
beings in almost every urban community in America.
According to a Senate Judiciary Committee report
recently released, it has been projected that
more than 23,220 people will be murdered in 1990--about
2,000 more than in 1989 and higher than the national
record of 23,040 murders in 1980. (Murder Rate
Surges…..1990) Senator Joseph R. Biden,
Jr. (D-Del.), the Committee chairman, commented
during the hearing: "The nation is faced
with an immediate peril and the situation is doomed
to get worse unless we take action today."
He called for an "all-fronts assault on the
drug epidemic" as well as swift House passage
of a Senate-passed crime bill that would ban domestically
manufactured assault weapons and impose the death
penalty for thirty-four federal offenses. (Murder
Rate Surges…..1990)
Franz Bockle and Jacques Pohier, in their book
The Death Penalty and Torture, (Bockle & Pohier,
1979) identify two major factors that affect the
public's current assessment of capital punishment.
First, they point out the extraordinary emphasis
placed upon crimes by the media and particularly
the audiovisual media.
Under the section entitled "The
Part Played By the Media," they state:
“It is particularly striking how many
newspapers, for example, nowadays regard it as
their special responsibility to give a full account
of the facts of a crime, to conduct an inquiry
in parallel with that of the police and in this
way to involve their readers in their pursuit
of the criminal. These newspapers reached perhaps
several hundred thousand people.
Information on the television, on the other
hand, reaches millions, even tens of millions.
The crime that is in the limelight at any given
time is repeated in the newspapers and on the
screen again and again, described in all its details
and subjected to a great deal of comments, so
that the readers, viewers and listeners' attention
is captured and retained. Oftentimes, the media
almost always fastens onto what is of secondary
importance and neglect the essential aspects of
a case; the reader is often given thrilling publications
and revelations and information which has often
the ability to broadcast the seeds of fear in
the minds and hearts of many of the viewers and
listeners.” (Bockle & Pohier, 1979)
Second, it is suggested that many public officials
take a less than honest approach to the question
of capital punishment. The authors boldly assert
that
“Unscrupulous politicians have a stake
in exploiting uninformed public opinion while
conscientious legislators are threatened with
loss of election for being permissive and soft
on crime if they do not join in the enactment
of the death penalty statutes.” (Bockle
& Pohier, 1979)
Undoubtedly, then, there are few issues in American
justice that spark passion like the death penalty.
In fact, many would deny that the death penalty
is a criminal justice issue at all, but instead
is one of basic human rights. Indeed, there are
emotional arguments both in support of and against
the death penalty.
It is of little consequence that the thirty-seven
states that execute criminals differ in the various
methods of execution. Whether the approach is
by shooting, hanging, electrocution, gassing,
or lethal injection, personal feelings are not
affected. On the one hand, there are those who
argue that capital punishment is wrong on the
theory that life is too sacred to be taken by
anyone, even by the State for what would appear
to be good reason.
On the other hand, those who favor the death
penalty will shake their heads, wondering why
they should value the murderer's life when one
did not value that of his victim. As with many
of life's most fundamental moral questions, there
seems to be no middle ground for compromise concerning
the death penalty.
Similar to the abortion debate, each side engages
in politics of confrontation rather than reconciliation.
The religious community is clearly obligated
to enter this great moral issue of our time. As
indicated by Richard Niebuhr in his book Christ
and Culture, (Niebuhr, 1951) they as Christians
are not isolated from civilization but are part
and parcel of society and everything included
in society.
Christ, according to Niebuhr's fifth motif,
converts and transforms culture, and as such all
human issues must get direction and invigoration
from Christ and those of them (Christians) who
profess to subscribe to the ideals of Christ.
(Niebuhr, 1951)
Arguments Against Capital
Punishment
Championed by the likes of recently retired Justice
William Brennan of the United States Supreme Court,
the opponents of capital punishment raise equally
forceful arguments. They first argue that the
death penalty serves no legitimate utility, and,
in fact, they assert, it has demonstrably failed
to accomplish its stated objectives. Modern scholars
and theologians commencing with the eighteenth
century have long rejected retribution as a valid
aim of the criminal justice system.
They have seriously challenged the right of the
State to execute. With respect to deterrence,
they claim that with over 20,000 homicides committed
each year, and only 300 convicted murders receiving
the death penalty, it is clear that the death
penalty does not deter.
In fact, they suggest that drug dealers are more
aware of the death penalty on the streets (for
selling bad drugs, or not paying for drugs, or
invading another's territory) than the State's
imposed capital punishment. Consequently, they
posit, when you successfully assail the only two
purposes advanced as support for capital punishment
(retribution and deterrence), any other purposes
can be achieved by other punitive measures.
For example, protection of society can be achieved
by incarcerating dangerous individuals for the
rest of their lives. Moreover, a life without
parole sentence can also serve to deter and can
address rehabilitation as a goal, which capital
punishment cannot. (Kiefer & Munitz, 1968)
Second, they argue that notwithstanding the
Supreme Court's opinion in Gregg v. Georgia, (1976)
the evolving standards of decency have not reached
a point where society as a whole condones State
executions.
They reject the notion of the majority on the
theory that the majority has frequently been wrong
throughout history. They argue that capital punishment
is barbaric and very cruel and unusual in the
sense that if we don't abuse the rapist, don't
burn down the house of the arsonist, don't beat
up the robber or the one who assaults, and don't
cut off the hand of the thief,
why should we kill the killer?
Third, the opponents argue that capital punishment
is arbitrarily and capriciously inflicted as a
punishment. It is beyond real debate that the
underclass, the poor, and the black in the country
disproportionately are the hardest hit and most
often the target of capital punishment.
Those without money to hire private attorneys
and those not the favorite of police, prosecutors,
judges, and governors are seen as the victims
of discriminatory application of the death penalty.
While no effort is being made to cast aspersions
on public defender agencies, the reality is that
inadequate funding and staffing problems give
rise to shortcomings in the quality of representation
with respect to the resources of the government.
There has also been statistical evidence established
with reference to the discrimination of African
Americans. The opponents of capital punishment
cite the Baldus study (1990) presented by a black
defendant who was convicted and sentenced to die
in Georgia for the robbery and murder of a white
police officer.
In the majority opinion by Supreme Court Justice
Powell, which held that the Baldus study did not
establish that Georgia's capital punishment scheme
violated the Equal Protection clause, the Court,
nevertheless, referenced the study in detail:
In support of his claim, McCleskey proffered
a statistical study performed by Professors David
C. Baldus, George Woodworth, and Charles Pulaski
[the Baldus study] that purports to show a disparity
in the imposition of the death sentence in Georgia
based on the race of the murder victim and, to
a lesser extent, the race of the defendant.
The Baldus study is actually two sophisticated
statistical studies that examine over 2,000 murder
cases that occurred in Georgia during the 1970's.
The raw numbers collected by Professor Baldus
indicate that defendants charged with killing
white persons received the death penalty in 11%
of the cases, but defendants charged with killing
blacks received the death penalty in only 1% of
the cases.
The raw numbers also indicate a reverse racial
disparity according to the race of the defendant:
4% of the black defendants received the death
penalty, as opposed to 7% of the white defendants.
(Baldus et al, 1990)
Fourth, capital punishment, as a punitive measure,
is final and irreversible, which the opponents
advance as the strongest reason for rejecting
the death penalty.
There have been mistakes in convictions throughout
history, and the death penalty precludes the opportunity
to rectify a miscarriage of justice. Hugo Bedau,
in his treatise The Death Penalty in America,
emphatically asserts that the innocent have been
executed and that there is no system of criminal
jurisprudence that has on the whole provided safeguards
against the conviction and possible execution
of an innocent man. (Bedau, 1964)
Fifth, similar to assertions by the proponents,
there is ample authority in the scripture replete
with suggestion for compassion, condonation, and
remorse as well as for retribution, which the
opponents dismiss as primitive and animalistic.
Sixth, the opponents stress the fiscal impact
and argue that the $1,000,000 amount per execution
(which includes the entire legal process) is too
costly and the sum should be placed elsewhere
to meet the State's pressing demands on the treasury
from its citizens. Last, the death penalty, many
observers have claimed, has made securing convictions
more difficult and has often resulted in the acquittal
of obviously guilty defendants.
In other words, unpunished criminals are walking
the streets because juries won't convict them
of capital crimes knowing that they would get
mandatory death. In short, many are satisfied
that mandatory capital punishment does indeed
have a deterrent effect: It deters jurors from
convicting probably guilty men.
(Bedau, 1975) To recap, it is the sacredness
of life, the criminal as a victim, and the discriminatory
application of the death penalty that undergird
the basic position of the opponents to capital
punishment.
The general African American religious and church
community (although there are signs this may be
changing) pretty much still adhere to its pre-Gregg
v. Georgia (1976) position.
The traditional and lingering statement of the
American Baptist Convention serves as today's
protocol for many churches and denominations:
1. Because the Christian believes
in the inherent worth of human personality and
in the unceasing availability of God's mercy,
forgiveness, and redemptive power, and
2. Because the Christian wholeheartedly
supports the emphasis in modern penology upon
the process of creative, redemptive rehabilitation,
rather than on punitive and primitive retribution,
and
3. Because the deterrent effects
of capital punishment are not supported by available
evidence, and
4. Because the death penalty
tends to brutalize the human spirit and the society
which condones it, and
5. Because human agencies of
legal justice are fallible, permitting the possibility
of the executing of the innocent.
We, therefore, recommend the abolition of capital
punishment and the reevaluation of the parole
system relative to such cases. (American Baptist
Convention…1960)
The time has now come for the church to enter
the debate and address the theological and ethical
arguments raised by the proponents and opponents
of capital punishment. Anything less is a disservice
of great magnitude. (Hutchinson, 1984)
Capital Mistakes
Twenty-five innocent persons have been executed
and anther 343 persons wrongfully convicted fo
capital offenses since 1900, according to claims
of a new capital punishment study.
More than 7,000 executions have taken place
in the United States during this century, which
yields a rate of error equivalent to one definite
erroneous conviction for a potential capital crime
for every 20 executions. The numbers include some
cases in which guild or innocence is still in
doubt.
Of the claimed wrongful convictions, 49 occurred
in the 1970s and 15 since 1980. they include situations
in which another person later confessed to the
crime and trial errors, resulting in reversal.
Since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1976 that
the death penalty under certain guidelines is
constitutional, the number of executions has increased
significantly.
Forty-nine persons have been executed since the
Supreme Court ruling, of which 17 were executed
in 1985. (McCormick, 1998)
Conclusion
Death penalty is an inhuman
method. There is no use of killing the killer.
Instead of promoting death penalty, there is a
great need to develop policies that will help
in reducing crimes and murders.
Bibliography
1. "Murder Rate Surges
Toward U.S. Record," Washington Post, August
1, 1990
2. Franz Bockle and Jacques Pohier,
The Death Penalty and Torture (New York: The Seabury
Press, 1979).
3. H. Richard Niebuhr, Christ
and Culture (New York: Harper & Row, 1951).
4. Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S.
153 (1976).
5. D. Baldus, C. Pulaski, and
G. Woodworth, Equal Justice and the Death Penalty
(Boston: Northeastern University Press 1990).
6. Hugo Adam Bedau, The Death
Penalty in America (Chicago: Aldine Publishing
Company, 1964), 189.
7. Hugo Adam Bedau, Capital Punishment
in the United States (New York: AMS Press, 1975),
49.
8. Howard E. Kiefer and Milton
K. Munitz, Ethics and Social Justice (Albany:
State University of New York Press, 1968), 53.
9. Bob Hutchinson, "Should
Christians Trumpet the Resurrection of the Death
Penalty?" Salt (4 June 1984): 9.
10. American Baptist Convention,
Statement on Capital Punishment. Adopted Rochester,
New York, June 7, 1960.
11. McCormick, John, The Wrongly
Condemned. Newsweek, 00289604, 11/09/98, Vol.
132, Issue 19, p64, 2p.
|