Wisconsin, my adopted state for the past 12 years, abolished the death penalty in 1853. Not 1953,
1853. (As far as states go, only Michigan abolished it earlier, in 1846, the first English-speaking government in the world to do so!) Now, certain state legislators want to put a non-binding referendum on the fall ballot, asking voters if they favor capital punishment for murders where there is a DNA match.
Can you guess which side of the aisle the folks putting this forth sit on?
If there was ever a contest for "Most Hypocritical Label of the Century," I'd have to say "Culture of Life" wins hands down, thrashing its nearest competitor, "Compassionate Conservatism." It's not that we
can't have a "culture of life" or display "compassionate conservatism," it's that the people who are trying to do it are really, really bad at it, and/or are habitually and dangerously disingenuous.
Of course, this "non-binding referendum" is a transparent political trick to get folks to the polls in November, as we have a gubernatorial race with a Democratic incumbent here this year. But the question is, why do things like this work?
My answer is that those who espouse a "Culture of Life" worldview pretty much love death and violence.
I, myself, would like to think that I support Life. I support affordable, accessible health care for all. I support well-funded, in-depth education not just about memorizing information, but how to find more information, how to think critically about information, and how to effectively use that information for the good of all. I support efforts of better environmental stewardship. I support true, life-long marriages between consenting adults of any persuasion. I support being respectful to the bodies and minds of all other people and animals. (Sorry, plants, I only support you until you're big enough to eat. Vicious, I know.) I support individuals making their own choices in decisions I have no part in: whether or not to have an abortion; what religion to belong to; what to do in the privacy of their own bedrooms/kitchens/rec rooms/hot tubs; and so on. I believe these things support the overall purpose and design of Life. (I don't believe that Life needs a "Designer" to have a design, but it does have a design. I agree with Christopher Alexander's view that Life is a natural property of the Universe.)
These days there are a lot of things in the news done and said by politicians that, to me, seem to go against Life: people being bombed, shot, tortured; people being told their relationships are meaningless; people being treated unfairly because of the color of their skin or where they come from or how much money they have; people's ability to express themselves being limited; people losing more and more privacy; animals being treated like machines on legs; tracts of land and all living things in them being destroyed or injured; the love of learning and rational thought being silenced and ridiculed... all sorts of crappy things.
And more often than not, who is behind these things? Who wants war? Who excuses torture? Who wants to ban same-sex marriage (or relationships altogether)? Who wants to build a wall between the US and Mexico? Who tells people to "watch what they say," establishes "free speech zones," and only lets select people in at speeches? Who taps our phones? Who allows, encourages, and profits from corporations that treat our living biosphere like some sort of giant meat grinder, where resources go in one end and money comes out the other? Who censors scientists, reduces funding for education, and trusts "gut feelings" over empirical facts?
If I had my choice of watching on TV some guy get shot 6 times or boobs, I'd choose boobs every time. Violence, death, destruction... these are OK to show. Sex, which seems to me a lot more pro-Life than violence, is forbidden. One example: the video game Grand Theft Auto is bad (wink), what with all the stealing and shooting and whatnot. But then when a secret part of the game where your character can have sex is discovered, watch out! It's the devil himself! Yikes!
It gives the appearance that people who decry our "culture of death" and who supposedly support a "Culture of Life" really don't give a shit about Life, only making sure their own lives are held up above some other people's lives.
Back to the death penalty. It makes a mockery of the "every life is sacred" angle used by anti-choicers. If you're going to be against abortion because "(human) life is sacred," then I don't see why you wouldn't also be against the death penalty. Or is it "life is sacred until age (14-18), then your ass is ours?" Who are we to judge who lives and dies? Usually the reason people want someone to die is that the convicted person decided that someone else should die. So two wrongs make a right somehow.
And the death penalty is horrible as a deterrent. Check out the table Nationwide Murder Rates by 2004 Rank (scroll down to the bottom of that page). While the murder rates have been falling pretty steadily since 1995, note that the states with highest murder rates are almost all states with the death penalty (Michigan, somewhat ironically, and Alaska being the two main exceptions). Check out that whole site, the Death Penalty Information Center, for tons of info about the issue.
If people are truly concerned about crime, they should support programs and prison reforms that help those who have already committed a crime, programs that help kids and adults make the choices that will lead them away from crime, and most importantly, help change a socio-economic system that helps imprison people in a way of life that makes crime look like a good, even reasonable, choice. Would doing all that be perfect? Of course not. But neither is the death penalty, and helping people is a lot more humane than killing them.
Unfortunately, I learned about the referendum question this week, and it is already almost on the ballot. (The Senate and Assembly bills both passed but have to be reconciled.) Regardless, if you're a cheesehead, I urge you to contact your State Senator and Assemblyperson and let them know of your displeasure that the issue was even brought up. We've somehow made it the last 153 years without the death penalty; I'm sure we can continue safely without it now.