A FEW THOUGHTS ABOUT THE DEATH PENALTY

One man's immorality is another man's justifiable act. The Amish community across the river from my mine considers the death penalty immoral. Most people in my middle-class neighborhood think differently. I gravitate toward the belief that morality is not as set in stone as people would like to think, so I understand and appreciate both points of view.

There's no disputing that some killers deserve the death penalty. I just don't think that we as a society should stoop to their level by returning violence for violence. That's never been a positive proposition, and given all the inequities that exist within our justice system when it comes to applying the death penalty, it appears highly unlikely that attempts at reform will achieve a positive end either.

Wanting an eye for an eye is an understandable sentiment, as is seeking a sense of closure for a victim's family and friends who want to move on with their lives. Striving for justice is certainly a must, but perhaps our society would benefit from examining all that is lost by maintaining a form of punishment so filled with inequity and uncertainty. Putting a prisoner to death costs more than a lifetime of incarceration and holds no possibility of correcting any injustice once carried out. Our money and time seem better spent elsewhere.

Then, there's the alternative. Pearl Buck once wrote, "To eat bread without hope is still slowly to starve to death." Pearl recognized that a life without hope holds little measurable value, which is why I tend to think that a life sentence without the possibility of parole or pardon, a sentence with no hope, is a much harsher punishment than a lethal injection.