Is The Death Penalty Right or Wrong? Part 3

State officials had better get the message that we must feel safe in our home, car, and streets or the seeds are sown for anarchy, vigilante justice, and lynch law.


[an error occurred while processing this directive]

Edit page New page Hide edit links

We are told that it is state-sanctioned murder to carry out the death penalty, but if that is true is it state-sanctioned kidnapping to keep a person in prison? Are fines state thievery?  It is incredible that opponents of the death penalty tell us that it perpetuates violence. They  can’t see the vast difference in a person who takes another person’s  life and the state doing so after a fair trial. Government is supposed to protect the innocent and punish the guilty. Those are the two functions of government, yet our states are failing at both.

It is almost always true that those people who oppose the death penalty for convicted killers (and I think that kidnappers, rapists and traitors should get death as they did 50 years ago) almost always are loud proponents of abortion!  Let’s see now: they don’t want vicious killers to be killed, but they do want innocent, unborn babies to be butchered! I don’t  understand that kind of thinking.

I have asked my opponents if I have a right to defend myself if a person is trying to kill me, and most of them agreed that it is acceptable. I then asked them, “If it is morally and legally right for me to defend myself—even killing my attacker—before I am killed, why is it wrong for the state to kill him after he has killed me?” They are strangely quiet.

Often, in desperation, my death penalty opponents remind me that most  nations have banned the death penalty as cruel and inhumane. I usually pause for a few seconds and say, “So?”  When European nations were ruled by tyrants like Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, etc., we didn’t emulate them by looking for a home-grown dictator, so why follow them in their folly now by abolishing a reasonable and scriptural tool for the sake of society? European nations are also collecting the fire arms from law-abiding citizens and opening their borders to almost anyone. Should we follow them in that direction? I think not.

We are told that we should forgive the killer, but I remind them that no killer has asked for my forgiveness. Besides he didn’t take the life of one of my relatives so I don’t have the right to forgive him. During a talk show I forgiveness and mercy was mentioned as it related to the Susan Smith case—the mother who drowned her two little boys. I had just demanded a death sentence for her, but the judge I was debating asked, “But what about mercy, Dr. Boys?” I replied, “Mercy you get from God; from the courts you expect justice.”

He said, “But the clergymen in her small town have all asked for mercy in her behalf.” I said, “Her two children would liked to have seen some mercy from her, but instead they were pushed into a lake to drown. Besides, preachers asking for mercy is not an argument, since most preachers pull on panty hose each morning  and wear lace on their shorts.” The host said, “What did you say?” I then repeated it, and he said, “I thought that’s what you said.”

We members of society must demand of our legislators that crime not pay. That message must resonate to every city and country town that killers will not be pampered and made heroes in the media. Killers will be executed and after all, that can facilitate the best kind of rehabilitation. If a man knows he is going to die in 30 days, while the ACLU, PAW, NAACP and other radical groups whine, weep, and carry candles for him, then maybe he will experience the ultimate in rehabilitation and turn to Christ for genuine salvation.

State officials had better get the message that we must feel safe in our home, car, and streets or the seeds are sown for anarchy, vigilante justice, and lynch law.

Tags: death penalty