If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
— Exodus 21:23-25
According to Wikipedia, the “eye for an eye” phrase above expresses the opinion of retributive justice. In the United States, one form that retributive justice takes is the death penalty. We are among the last democracies in the world to continue this form of punishment.
Thirty eight states have the death penalty. Since 1976, Virginia is second in the nation (behind Texas) in the number of executions performed. Since 1973, over 120 people have been released from death row as the result of their proven innocence.
As I mentioned before, my brother was murdered, the twelfth anniversary of his death is coming up in a few days. You might think that I would wholeheartedly support the death penalty because of that, but you would be wrong. I recognize that there are crimes that are so heinous, perpetrated by people who are evil and serve no purpose for society, that the death penalty is the only appropriate punishment. But do I think that it should be given out as frequently and capriciously that it has been? No. Most of the arguments in favor of the death penalty are quite hollow to me. Like abortion, the imposition of the death penalty should be rare.
If the death penalty is no deterrent – and the evidence suggests that is the case – then expanding the definition doesn’t accomplish a thing. Governor Kaine’s veto of legislation that would do so is dead on:
“While the nature of the offenses targeted by this legislation are very serious, I do not believe that further expansion of the death penalty is necessary to protect human life or provide for public safety needs.”
We did elect Tim Kaine, not Jerry Kilgore. Expanding the death penalty does nothing to make me safer. Kudos to Governor Kaine for having the courage and the moral conviction to veto these bills. And I urge the legislature to follow his lead.
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
Politicians have twisted God’s Word to suit their political ambitions. This, in itself, is sin. God’s Word is only to be used to serve God, not man. We all know what political party is most guilty of this abuse. I wish I knew the author of this quote, but it says a whole lot about today’s politicians.
“Whenever members of an establishment confuse their desire to maintain their own power with their duty to guard the public trust, sound judgment will invariably become impossible for them. Their blind ambition will keep them from seeing and comprehending the very truth they are to guard”
The death penalty serves no purpose beyond (likely inadequately) satisfying the bloodlust of some portion of the population. The sooner it disappears, the better.
Vivian, thank you for this post. My cousin was murdered in cold blood in a hold up. But, like you, I do not support the death penalty. I don’t need to repeat you. You said it all and very well!
Um… Vivian, did you read those verses in context? They’re talking about what should happen to someone who causes a woman to give birth prematurely.
“If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.”
Interestingly enough the unborn baby has the same value as someone already born.
You want context? Here are some other bits of Biblical wisdom from that same chapter:
If your slave won’t leave 7 years after you buy him, shove an awl through his ear and keep him forever.
If you sell your daughter to be a slave, she shouldn’t head out with the menfolk.
Curse out your mom or dad? Death penalty!
Your ox kills a slave? That’ll be thirty shekels, please.
Yeah, totally the place to look for moral guidance and authority.
I,for one, am glad we are living under grace and forgiveness now.
We do, IF we confess ours sins and ask forgiveness.
Wow, between MB and Louis, who are so much more enlightened than the common people, I feel
as smug as they are, uh I mean smarter for having read their insights into morality.ugh
Squeaklette, I know you’ve got a thing for me, so I can ignore that, but are you saying that you disagree with what Louis wrote?
The question I pose is of the folks put to death by the state, how many of them have gone on to commit further acts of violence against society? Zero. The death penalty may not be an absolute deterrent, but it does serve the purpose of preventing certain henious individuals from ever having the capability to threaten society again.
Virginia Voter, our system of jurisprudence was established to exact justice for crimes committed by a defendent for which he was convicted by a jury of his peers–not for crimes which have not yet occured, nor (in the case of the innocently-convicted reference by Vivian) for crimes not committed by the defendent for which he was convicted anyway. Or to steal the framing of your argument: how many of those folks put to death by the state went on to reform and redeem themselves as best they could? None, for none were ever given the opportunity.
Vengeance is mine, sayeth the Lord; but having appropriated the divine rights of Judgement and Vengeance from the Lord our God, shall we reserve Mercy alone for our Creator? I hope that we shall not, or we should be a very sad race indeed.
Squeaklette, more than glad to enlighten you. Anytime you need some help in political ethics, I am here for you, and the candidates you have helped elect by your using God’s Word for their personal gain.
No need to, really. The point was not the context, the point was that those verses are where the phrase originated from.
Curious….For those who are Christians, I would assume that they would be against the death penalty; at least, my impression of the New Testament would lead me to believe this. (Which I do.)
And what about God’s commandment that says “though shalt not kill”?
“Squeaklette“? Oh yeah, I forgot, Liberals don’t name call. Hypocrites.
Here is what I do not undertsand: Libs love to allow (and pay for) abortion and the killing of a child that has committed no crime but will spare the life of a killer. Yeah, makes sense.
BTW, what does “Squeaklette” mean anyway? Are you calling me a girl or something childish? Is calling me a female a bad thing, so now being female is bad and weak? Ah yes, have to love the double talk of liberals.
Hey Vivian… These are the type of people amomg others that represent your party and cause. You must be porud [chuckle huckle]