-
1 of 10
-
2 of 10
-
3 of 10
-
4 of 10
-
5 of 10
-
6 of 10
-
7 of 10
-
8 of 10
-
9 of 10
-
10 of 10
Supreme Court practices ‘lethal’ decision-making
Archive
Comments
Story
The day and age in which we live is often described with the societal highlights of today’s advancements. The information superhighway and elevated big business generosity in terms of corporate philanthropy are topics which warrant ample emphasis.
Other less attractive aspects of community living are masked by a smokescreen of secrecy, which we all know better than to speak of. Society’s ultra sensitivity and compulsion with political correctness hampers not only “holiday” festivities, but our capability to truly and understandably communicate with one another.
Capital punishment is only one of the many touchy issues our country has often deemed too racy to discuss. But whether or not we are interested or even prepared to deal with the ramifications of this legal practice, the death penalty issue has once again reared its influence into our lives.
On Wednesday, June 26, the Supreme Court banned the use of execution as punishment in child rape cases, stating that the penalty was too harsh for the crime. Amidst the unyielding, enduring pain and anguish of their victims, countless offenders were bestowed with the promise of continued existence.
According to the left-wing Justice Anthony Kennedy and his four liberal counterparts, child rapists are now exempt from the death penalty, not because their committed crime is of minute seriousness, but because “in terms of moral depravity and of the injury to the person and to the public,” child rape crimes cannot be likened to murder in their “severity and irrevocability,” Kennedy said.
Throughout proceedings, Justice Kennedy emphasized his belief that capital punishment be reserved for only the most atrocious crimes. This ruling annuls laws in six states, which instituted possible capital punishment implication in child rape trials. Two Louisiana cases are the first to illustrate the wrath and emotional fallout resulting from the recent judgment. Louisiana’s former law allowed capital punishment outcomes for people convicted of raping children under 12. A case in point of the law change is an 8-year-old girl, from Harvey, La., who was raped by her step-father. Thanks to the Supreme Court’s ruling, her step-father cannot be tried with the highest punishment possible, which has inspired raving throughout Louisiana and spread to various U.S. leaders.
“One thing is clear: The five members of the court who issued the opinion do not share the same ’standards of decency’ as the people of Louisiana,” Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal said.
Presidential hopefuls John McCain and Barack Obama have both offered displeasing comments regarding the recent court decision as well.
As we all well know, the death penalty is a hot topic that has fueled frenzied conversations and political banter for years. Yet the Supreme Court has changed things. This story should not be shrugged off as another article about the country’s never-ending mind struggle on whether it should play God or not. This ruling isn’t only about the use of capital punishment. Such a change has the potential to challenge the minds of the citizens of this country to ponder the more complex and ethical idea behind capital punishment use depending upon the differentiation of crime severity.
As intelligent human beings we are all entitled to our own opinions and are encouraged to share our personal insights. As a country, we should reflect our opinions regarding capital punishment in the same democratic manner we decide all other lawful matters. In other words, if we feel the use of the death penalty remains applicable to the standards of today, then we should continue to use it, under an all-encompassing blanket assignment. If the country decides capital punishment is far too heinous for crimes assigned to it than it should be outlawed entirely. Life isn’t about picking and choosing.
KAYLA CHRISTOPHERSON
Lead Opinion Journalist
