What is the matter with the people
who won't execute a beyond doubt murderer?
Do they just blindly accept 'Thou shalt not kill'
though probably not even practising Christians?
Are they all conscientious objectors
who wouldn't kill an enemy in a war?
"Oh, that's different" they'll say. But it isn't.
If there is any acceptable killing
of another person, who most deserves to die,
the enemy soldier fighting for his country
(just like us) or the murderer of little children?
"There's always doubt about the conviction"
No, some murders are proved beyond all doubt
or even, in a few cases, admitted.
And don't say "Execution is barbaric"
One mark of a civilised society
is not that it doesn't execute
but that it doesn't torture before execution.
"But everyone has the right to life"
Do you think Nature gives that right?
If you are alone in a desert, lost
and dying of thirst, try saying "I have the right to life"
and see what difference it makes.
It's human societies that give rights
to those who keep their laws.
Those who break the laws are punished
by the withdrawal of their rights
e.g. to 'liberty and the pursuit of happiness'
when they are imprisoned.
So rights can be withdrawn !
Why not the right to life itself?
Life in nature isn't sacred;
creatures kill each other naturally.
And don't start on about 'rehabilitation'.
Why do you care so much about the murderer
and so little about the victim?
Why aren't you totally outraged
about some-one having their life stolen?
A murderer cannot make good their crime;
they cannot bring the victim back to life.
Having stolen some-one else's life
they must forfeit their own
It's what's called justice.
Or shall we spend millions on them,
keeping them alive in prison
and caring for their welfare
when we won't spend so much for so many ill patients?