>
> I thought you opposed the death penalty, calling it a form of
> ritual sacrifice. Is this the only sort of case you support it in?
>
> -- Shane
>
Tough question. I usually get very upset by violent behavior and since death penalty is a form of violence - I oppose it on those grounds. I recall seeing a documentary in a series "eye on justice" organized by NLG which showed the mechnics of administering death penalty - very creepy indeed. But, otoh, I also feel the same about slaughter houses and hunting. By the same token, I strongly oppose criminal violence - I think is it a far more prevalent form of violence than the state administered violence. I think every society has the right to incapacite violent and dangerous individuals - it is utterly foolish not to do it.
I am a staunch atheist and do not believe in the "sanctity" of human life, the soul business etc. that permeate out thinking about life and justice. Life - be it human or animal (no difference) - is nothing but a series of chemical reactions, and death is a natural consequence of it. The only thing that matters is the sensation of pain or pleasure - we seek pleasure and avoid pain. Since death can be, or it is often seen as painful (physically and emotionally) - we tend to fear it. But in the great scheme of life, taking away human life is no more or less moral than, say, slaughtering a chicken for dinner, or cutting a tree. We cut flowers to decorate our homes, we kill cows and chicken to enjoy our meals, we abort fetuses that distrub our life style, and we kill humans who threaten us so we can enjoy a peaceful life.
Of course the mechanics of killing may be upsetting on aesthetic or emotional grounds, but that is a different thing. I personally cannot think of killing a living thing to the point that when my Christian wife wanted a christmass tree I insisted that it should be a potted or a plastic one (watching all those kitschy ornaments on a dying tree was a bit upsetting, besides you do not have to clean the mess after the christmass business is over). But I also have the proportionally stronger reaction when I see violent men. I think they should be destroyed in the same way we destroy animals that attack people - actually it makes more sense to destroy a violent man than to destroy a dog - dogs usually do not attack when unprovoked. Destroying one violent man has an added benefit of saving lives of other people - so in the balance of life and death it tips the balance in favor of life.
So to make a long story short - I am in principle opposed to violence, and that means, inter alia, state sanctioned violence. Butr I am not dogmatic, and now that in real life killing is unavoidable. Since I make no distinction between human and non-human life, I do not think that destroyng violent men is any different than destroying dangerous animals, although the act of destroying them can be emotionally and aesthetically upsetting.
Wojtek