<-- Kangaroo paw monster in the garden"Prime Minister John Howard says Saddam Hussein's trial and verdict are a triumph for the Iraqi people."
How thin our veneer of civilisation is.
Is opposing the death penalty a sign of 'civilisation'? I suppose I just take it as a given - the death penalty is bad.
And surely if anyone deserves to die, Saddam Hussein does.
And yet...the joy and dancing in the streets at his sentence leaves me uneasy.
But... he hasn't killed any of my relatives, so am I entitled to an opinion?
If only those directly affected by crimes made the decisions about what happens to the criminals it would definitely be an eye-for-an-eye system of justice...
Too complex for me with my limited knowledge of philosophy, law and history.
I'm just left with this vague disturbed feeling as people celebrate a man (a monster! the contemporary face of evil!) condemned to death.
Addendum 7/11/06: I've just found that Susoz has expressed the same concerns in a much more articulate fashion. What a relief! it's so terrifying for me to think that I am putting forward an opinion that might be different to the dominant consensus - what if I'm wrong?
1 comment:
I think this is a really hard one. My gut emotional response to news that Saddam Hussein received the death sentence was 'well, good', even tho I oppose the death sentence, because of some of the reprehensible things he's done.
But ...I don't support the death sentence. I can't support the taking of human life as a form of 'justice taking its course.' And I'm really, really uncomfortable about John Howard's support for the death penalty, esp after the Van case in Singapore. To me, it's says he's in bed with Bush even more than most of the American population is, and that he's probably going to do diddly-squat for anyone facing the death penalty overseas. (It's not just that he's a conservative, but a nasty, manipulative, underhanded one.)
Post a Comment