Supreme Court Rulings, Pt. 1: The Death Penalty

From CNN:

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 Wednesday that child rapists cannot be executed, concluding that capital punishment for crimes against individuals can be applied only to murderers.

Patrick Kennedy, 43, was on Louisiana's death row after being convicted of raping his 8-year-old stepdaughter.  The ruling stemmed from the case of Patrick Kennedy, who appealed the 2003 death sentence he received in Louisiana after being convicted of raping his 8-year-old stepdaughter.

Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in the majority opinion that execution in this case would violate the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, citing "evolving standards of decency" in the United States.  Such standards, the justice wrote, forbid capital punishment for any crime against an individual other than murder.

"We conclude that, in determining whether the death penalty is excessive, there is a distinction between intentional first-degree murder on the one hand and nonhomicide crimes against individual persons, even including child rape, on the other," wrote Kennedy, who is not related to the convicted rapist.

As this is a blog, here's the editorial part of the post. I personally disagree with the death penalty being used for any crime first and foremost because deciding when another person should die seems like a highly-flawed system that is backwards and opposed to the purpose of human life (this take on the right to life should not be confused with my documented pro-choice stance nor should the right to life regarding the death penalty be confused and conflated with the right to die, as in refusing treatment, etc.).

First, some insight by famous people who are far smarter than myself. There is a reason that the vast majority of the world evolved beyond Hammurabi's Code. In the words of Mohandas "Mahatma" Gandhi, "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."  While the purpose of human life is constantly pondered by everyone who attempt to answer this evasive question in numerous ways, including religion, the late Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. summed it up best in "Sirens of Titan" stating, "The purpose of human life, no matter who is controlling it, is to love whoever is around to be loved."  

From a different standpoint, the intentional killing of another person, unless in a situation where self defense of any other kind is impossible, is first degree murder, no matter who the killer(s) is/are.

One of the most heated issues surrounding the death penalty debate is the role that DNA testing plays in determining guilt or innocence of the accused.  With more and more technological developments, many wrongly convicted people have finally been acquitted due to the proof of innocence that DNA testing provides.  However, in many cases, there is no DNA evidence available to be tested for definitive proof of guilt or innocence.  In such situations, there can almost never be 100%  certainty of guilt that would demand such a strong sentence.  

 As Benjamin Franklin said, "That it is better 100 guilty persons should escape than that one innocent person should suffer, is a maxim that has been long and generally approved. They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."   Agreed.

Furthermore, states without the death penalty have consistently lower murder rates.  Therefore, not only is the death penalty ineffective at determining real guilt but states that choose capital punishment also end up suffering from the very criminal actions that they are trying to prevent.

Additionally, the United States prides itself on being a progressive country that is a model for the rest of the world.  So it makes perfect sense that the USA uses a form of punishment exempt from the 8th Amendment and continues an ancient practice of state-sponsored murder (wars could also fall under this category), riiight?  WRONG.  The USA is actually one of the few "developed" countries in the world to still have the death penalty legally allowed.  For the breakdown of countries, click here.  While our "oh-so-effective" criminal justice system helped us to become the country in the world with the largest percentage of our population imprisoned with a total of 2 million people (80% of which are minorities and 70% of the 2 million being imprisoned for petty crimes. Oh yeah!  Also, we build more prisons than schools), we also made the list of countries that execute the most people per year.  WE'RE NUMBER ONE!  WE'RE NUMBER ONE!

Amnesty International has some more to say:

Key facts:  

-137 countries have abolished the death penalty in law or practice.

-60 countries retain and use the death penalty, most often as a punishment for people convicted of murder.

-At least 1,252 people were known to be executed in 24 countries during 2007. The true figure was certainly higher.

-88 per cent of all known executions in 2007 took place in China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and the USA.

 

More Key Facts:

Death sentences and executions in 2007

Abolitionist and retentionist countries

Countries abolitionist for all crimes

Countries abolitionist for ordinary crimes only

Countries abolitionist in practice

Executions of child offenders since 1990

Ratification of international treaties

 

For the full CNN article, click here.

For the Amnesty International webpage on the Death Penalty, click here.

The Crisis in Myanmar

View Larger Map

A week ago, Cyclone Nargis slammed into the southeast Asian country of Myanmar (AKA Burma). Although the death count stood as low as 350 a few days ago, it is now estimated that 100,000 people have died, and millions more are homeless and at serious risk of disease due to a lack of clean drinking water.

The military junta that runs the country has acted irresponsibly and continues to do so. The government was warned that the cyclone was coming, but did nothing to inform the people. Now, the junta is making it harder for international aid organizations to bring aid into the country and distribute it among the people.

Luckily, there are a couple actions you can take to help the people of Myanmar. You can donate money to the International Burmese Monks Organization. According to Avaaz.org:

In many of the worst-hit areas, the monasteries are the only source of shelter and food for Burma's poorest people. They have been on the front lines of the aid effort since the storm struck. Other forms of aid could be delayed, diverted or manipulated by the Burmese government--but the monks are the most trusted and reliable institution in the country.

If you are unable to give money, you can donate rice to the UN World Food Program while developing your vocabulary through FreeRice.com. Although Free Rice began in October 2007 and will likely be around long after the Myanmar crisis, rest assured that the UN World Food Program is working to send supplies into Myanmar. And since the damage to the Irrawaddy Delta, Myanmar's "Rice Basket", will limit the supply of rice, raising prices when prices are already high, the work of the World Food Program is needed more than ever, not just for Burma but for the world.

Update: Through Amnesty International, you can also email the Burmese ambassador to the U.S., urging his country not to restrict aid or in away way influence its dispersion.