Written by Pete Davidson
Hippies oppose it, academia shuns it, and the city of San Francisco is deeply offended by it — yes, it’s the death penalty. Yet its opposition is not limited to the fore-mentioned, some of the students and faculty at Harding seem to be rather confused on this hot button issue. While students on campus are active in spreading awareness and “social justice” they are unsure of their stance in regards to capital punishment. In fact, it seems as though their first inclination is to oppose it.
Students will cling to the arguments of compassion and love but rarely do we as Christians speak of justice. And as offensive as it might sound, death, in some cases is equivalent to justice. However, often times when the death penalty is discussed, only one side is brought up — the side of innocent men dying at the hands of a tyrannical government. But there are always two sides to every story and that side must be defended.
For some reason unbeknownst to me, after the murder of an innocent human, some Christians will leap to side of the guilty. While they openly admit that the crime was evil, they maintain that the criminal should simply go to prison. It is out of good intentions that some followers of Christ feel this way; their case is that perhaps the guilty will turn to Jesus and repent of what they have done. I truly hope this is the case, but often we as a society forget about the victims and their families. Justice is about harmony and fairness. How then can an innocent man die, and his murderer live? How is that just? In the same way, what if a child is murdered? To his mother he will always remain a child, never seeing another birthday or being able to tell his parents he loves them. While his murderer can celebrate turning a year older and even if he is imprisoned, having the luxury of seeing his mother through the glass and listening to her words of encouragement and love. How is that fair? How is that right? But yet again some believers will pipe in with, “well perhaps he’ll turn to Christ.” Perhaps, but did the murderer not already have that opportunity? And what of his victim, his chance to gain salvation was cut short, is that in itself not punishable?
But what about the practical side of this issue? Say a murderer or a rapist is imprisoned and supposedly taken off the streets for good, but after years of good behavior is released back into society only to commit the same crime again. Now, not only was one life taken or destroyed but the government is failing to protect its citizens due to the fact that the concept of death is so offensive. However, is it not offensive that justice was not served and the rights of the innocent were neglected? Now more families are left to grieve and morn the loss of their beloved.
Yet, there is another aspect of the capital punishment that hasn’t been mentioned: deterrence. This is the most logical of all the arguments defending the death penalty. If there is a terrible consequence for an atrocious act, then that act will not be committed as frequently. It is the same concept of spanking a child (which is also considered politically incorrect). If a child does something wrong he gets spanked, ergo, the child will stop doing the act that gets him spanked. And, most likely his little brother won’t perform the act that got his big brother spanked. The argument is applicable to capital punishment. If rapists know they are going to be killed if they rape, they’ll most likely stop!
The argument for capital punishment could go for pages and pages, yet it is to Holy Scripture that we must turn to decide what is truly right. And our creator, the giver of life spoke through his apostle Paul when he wrote the words of Romans 13 and the description of government. He stated: “But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing.”
