Quote:
Originally Posted by dekeguy
I am generally philosophically opposed to capital punnishment in most cases. In this instance I am pondering exactly what I think. Dead he could be seen as a martyr, alive he could be a rallying point for the Ba'ath party.
Legally the appropriate courts have heard the case and rendered their decisions, both at first instance and on appeal. Morally there is very little to recommend him, not much in the way of mitigation. On a practical note it is probably better that he be removed to bring closure to a terrible chapter in the history of that nation. If he was jailed for life there is always the possibility that he could be released in the future and stir up things again.
If I were the one making the decision I would follow the law as I had sworn to do. From a personal point of view I would have no problem shooting him in combat but I have some reservations about state sanctioned executions in general which to me seem to diminish the majesty of the law by lowering the state to the level of the one who is being executed. "An Eye for an Eye" was an easy concept to grasp a couple of thousand years ago, but I think we have come to understand things a bit better since then.
An old Jesuit priest once told me that God reveals Himself and His will to us as we become capable of understanding and comprehending Him and His will.
As a convinced man of faith I figure I am responsible to try to understand and comprehend what we are supposed to do. So, to quote the late Yul Brenner in his role as the King of Siam, "Is a puzzlement"!
|
An eye for an eye is not biblical. It goes all the way back to Hammurabi's code.
I'm not comfortable with the execution, but then I remember what he's done to thousands of his people over the years. I hate the death penalty, but Iraq is a different country with different beliefs so...