|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
| |
||||
| ||||
z |
|||
The words of Jesus to those who crowded around the woman caught in adultery, 'Let anyone among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her' (John 8:7), echoed in my mind as I prepared this newsletter. Jesus seemed to be saying there is no justification for acts of violence by one human being against another human being. We all have sinned. Killing another human being because of their evil acts was not acceptable to Jesus. He moved to restore the woman rather than taking vengeance. There are many other reasons to oppose the death penalty. The following editorial highlights the inequity seen in the application of the death penalty in sentencing. This editorial appeared in the Ft. Wayne Journal-Gazette, Wednesday, Nov. 12, 2003 Death penalty roulette - Anyone who ever doubted that the death
penalty is a game of chance needs only look at the plea agreement reached
between Seattle prosecutors and the Green River killer. Gary Leon Ridgway
pleaded guilty to killing 48 women and admitted killing as many as 60.
Yet he escaped capital punishment by agreeing to help investigators find
the remains of his victims. The killings were pre-meditated murders, and
he showed no remorse. Consider some of the statements in his written confession
read in court last week: "I killed so many women, I have a hard time
keeping them straight." "Choking is what I did and I was pretty
good at it." "I picked prostitutes because I thought I could
kill as many of them as I wanted without getting caught." Ridgway's
admission makes him the nation's most prolific serial killer, with more
victims than Jeffrey Dahmer, John Wayne Gacy or Ted Bundy - all of whom
were executed. And the numbers do nothing to reflect the terror he created
in the area south of Seattle in the early 1980s, when he killed most of
his victims and dumped several of them along the Green River. Anyone with
even a fleeting familiarity with the criminal justice system knows that
the playing field simply isn't level. Even when fair-minded judges and
prosecutors oversee cases, the result is dependent upon countless other
factors - the defendant's wealth, the abilities of his attorney, the makeup
of the juries, the mood of the community and nation, the quality of the
police investigation, the resources of the victims. In most criminal cases,
though, defendants get their lives back after serving sentences. Those
sentenced to life in prison have ample opportunities for appeals and to
change at least some aspects of their lives through education or religion.
Not so, of course, for those put to death, the highest-stakes penalty
that warrants utmost fairness - an even-handedness that society simply
does not have. It is unfair when the Green River killer purposely set
out to kill four dozen women and escapes the death penalty while Joseph
Corcoran of Fort Wayne, mentally ill, shoots four people in a sudden rage
and is sentenced to die because he didn't want to plea bargain. Or when
Gregory Resnover of Indianapolis is executed for shooting a police officer,
though it was another man who fired the bullet that killed the officer.
It was such uneven application of the death penalty that led former Illinois
Gov. George Ryan to first impose an execution moratorium, then commute
the death sentences of the state's 167 death row inmates. Ridgway escaped
death because police couldn't find all his victims without the killer's
help. And who cannot believe that had he preyed on college coeds or wealthy
women instead of prostitutes that his execution would be far more likely?
The state, the government - we the people - have no business engaging
in legal executions, especially when we protect or kill a defendant based
on the wild cards he holds. [top] Actions and Resources Resources [top]
Pacifism and Women's Resistance; Toward a new theology by Beth
Graybill (MCC U.S. Women's Concerns Director) 'As Carol Penner has noted in her doctoral dissertation entitled "Mennonite Silences and Feminist Voices: Peace Theology and Violence Against Women," traditional peace theology has not been helpful to victims of sexual abuse or assault. In fact, I believe it has often added a layer of guilt. Our tradition of nonresistance has helped contribute to violence against women by implicitly encouraging women to accept abuse as Christ-like suffering, rather than to resist. But Jesus taught us to pray, "Deliver us from evil," as I discuss later... '...As I have struggled to make sense of my experience spiritually, I
believe that what is needed is a new theological framework. Rather than
the more typical sin-salvation-atonement framework, I would like to suggest
a three-part survivor theology of security, resistance, and accompaniment.' Resources [top]
[top]
| |||
© 2003 Mennonite Central Committee |