Friday, May 13, 2005

Ross Executed

Well, Michael Ross got his wish early this morning. It goes without saying the man was scum. But I can't help wondering about whether the death penalty is morally right. I think it is, but then I wonder if we "men" are taking too much upon ourselves when we take a life for what would seem to be legitimate reasons. Perhaps this is a function of trying to reconcile my "pro-life" stance with my support for the death penalty. A comment made by the mother of one of Ross's victims particularly struck me.
"I thought I would feel closure, but I felt anger just watching him lay there and sleep after what he did to these women," [Debbie] Dupris said. "But I'm sure I will feel some closure soon."
Meanwhile, a Connecticut judge offered this:
"After the execution, what will the state of Connecticut have gained from all of this? The answer seems to be that, minimally, the state has secured the proverbial pound of flesh for the crimes of this one outrageously cruel man," wrote state Supreme court Justice Flemming Norcott Jr. in a ruling that cleared the way for Ross' execution.
My is based upon the presumption that innocent life was inherently worthy and should be safeguarded, but that once we become reasoning adults, we are responsible for our own actions. Thus, the guilty must pay. This is informed by both tradition and the Old Testament. Nonetheless, I still debate whether it is presumptious on our part, or not, to take life, no matter how despicably it has been lived.

No comments: