|
When we use the term “justice,” it can mean one of two distinctly different paths: justice as vengeance, or justice as love. (See Two Forms of Justice) A simple explanation of each would be that justice as vengeance is founded upon the moral code, “an eye for an eye,” while “do unto others as you would have them do unto you,” is the foundation for justice as love. (See Golden Rule in World Religions) These are mutually exclusive moral codes. When we choose one, we necessarily reject the other.
A death sentence is imposed by a judicial decree signed by a judge. It seeks retribution for a wrong, and is the ultimate form of the vengeful, “eye for an eye” moral order at work. Execution by judicial decree leaves no doubt that we, as a people, embrace violence and vengeance in our code of morality and in our code of law.
Violence acquires legitimacy in many ways in our culture. It is a common event seen on television. Sometimes it is glorified in movies. It is given theological legitimacy by some religious doctrines. This makes it hard for justice as love to emerge; for a plea for forgiveness or clemency to be heard.
And yet, when justice as love is practiced, it is powerful. The entire nation was overwhelmed when we saw the power of love in the humble, loving forgiveness of the Amish in response to the terrible events that unfolded in a one-room Amish school in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania on October 2, 2006.
“Let the words said here go forth,
the transformation begin with us.”
~ Rev. Duane Britton,
Amish pastor
There, a man with a gun held 10 young Amish girls hostage. He killed five of them (three died immediately) and wounded the others, before killing himself. But the Amish did not respond as we have come to expect Americans to in such circumstances.
First, some Amish elders visited the wife of the murderer, and extended forgiveness to her family. They invited her to the funerals of the slain girls. They requested that all the money given to the grieving Amish families be shared with murderer’s family. And more than thirty members of the Amish community attended the funeral of the killer. Never once did they call for vengeance or retribution.
The Amish stood four square within the teachings of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount. It’s a message grounded in the Golden Rule and similar teachings found in every major world religion. The Amish caused many to question if justice requires that one who has committed murder join his victim in death by being executed by the state. It forced many to ask, “When we have achieved our retribution by killing again, how have we distinguished ourselves from those whom we have condemned?”
Giving and receiving are one. Each time we kill pursuant to judicial decree, we also kill the notion we are a loving people, a people of compassion and of peace. Our executions in the name of public order teach our children that justice means vengeance. We create the monster, then we weep when our children themselves seek vengeance and engage in violence, to secure “justice” for themselves. (See Dual Morality)
Positive public policy is the moral order grounded on the principle that we serve our own interests when we treat others as we desire to be treated. It demands that we step away from vengeance so that we might advance toward love. It means that to enjoy a non-violent society, we must refrain from officially sanctioning violence.
Positive public policy does not require that people who are a danger to others and themselves are left free to roam the streets committing mayhem. It means that we stop the mayhem and hold wrongdoers accountable while also seeking to heal the wounds they have inflicted, and to restore peace and trust within the community. These are goals the vengeance model of justice is not designed to achieve. (See Restorative Justice)
Death penalty cases are one of the best examples of how flawed our criminal justice system is when it comes to discovering the truth. Since 1973, at least 123 people in 25 states have been released from death row because of evidence that proved they were innocent—evidence presented after they had been convicted and sentenced to die. Before their innocence was proved, years of their lives were spent behind bars, their families suffered the consequences of the wrongful charges, and tax payers paid millions of dollars for these proceedings.
For more information, including detailed statistics about the death penalty in the United States, please visit Death Penalty Info.
To learn more about positive public policy, see:
o Positive & Fear-Based Public Policy
o Monomorality & Dual Morality
o Holonomous & Wedge Approach
o Seven Spiritual Principles
o Voices for Love or Fear
o The Golden Rule in World Religions
o Positive Public Policy Partners
|
