The Battalion
[he i
OPINION
Wednesday, February 21,1990
Opinion Page Editor
Ellen Hobbs
Conservatives can be against death penalty too
“Liberals” may skip this column. I
address my remarks to the people often
called “conservatives;” more accurately,
I speak to those who believe that
government intervention is not
necessarily the answer to every problem.
I will discuss the use of government
power as it affects one important issue:
the death penalty.
I was raised in a socially and
politically conservative environment.
There I learned respect for individuals
and f or authority, the importance of law
and order, reverence for the flag and
the Constitution, and a vague distrust of
government in general.
Knowing my social background, it
comes as no surprise that I believe death
to be an appropriate punishment for
premeditated murder. 1 believe in
justice and the rule of law, and 1 feel
strongly that any person who
deliberately takes another life thereby
forfeits claim to her or his own.
Jeff
Farmer
Columnist
liberty as well as justice “for all.” Let’s
consider freedom in this context. As we
see daily in the news reports from
Eastern Europe, the only way for people
to be free is for the power of
government to be limited.
1 have no sympathy for the likes of
(mass-murderer) Ted Bundy or (former
Romanian dictator) Nicolai Ceausescu.
Their vicious hands were stained with
the blood of many innocents; the simple
death they received was much kinder
than what they deserved. It doesn’t
bother me a bit that their punishment
might have been “cruel;” they meted
out far more cruelty to others than they
experienced.
The pledge of allegiance speaks of
This limitation is painful, but vital.
The price of keeping the innocent out
of jail is that many who are guilty go
free. The price of allowing people to
run their own lives is that people often
do a rotten job of it, sometimes with
tragic consequences. These are a few of
the inevitable costs of freedom.
Understanding this fact is the key to
properly defining the role of
government in a free society. Power
corrupts and will inevitably be abused; it
must be balanced and controlled.
Just because there is something the
government cun do doesn’t mean it's
something the government should do.
Religion important in abortion
I deeided that it was time to put in my
two cents wort h on the abortion issue
that has dominated both the Opinion
Page and American politics in the past
months. I offer the following viewpoint
which I like to consider both pro-choice
and pro-life.
My religion (1 am Jewish) teaches me
that a human life is the most precious
gift that we have and that its
preservation ought to be an overriding
concern in all affairs. However, my
religion also professes that life begins at
birth rather than at conception. Jewish
hospitals, in the event of a life-
threatening pregnancy, save the mother
because the fetus is not considered to be
a viable living being. In Catholic and
most other Chrisitan hospitals, where
life is thought to begin at conception,
the child is saved. v
There are as many scientific opinions
on the beginning of life as there are
stars in the sky; it is futile and
inappropriate to use this approach to
justify either angle. As views of Cod
vary between religions, so do views of
the beginning of life.
Out morals and ethics in general are
functions of our religious upbringings,
and so, like religion, are extememly
personal. Many in this country follow
Christian teachings and find their lives
fulfilled by them. We must remember,
however, that others gain equal
satisfaction f rom faiths like Judaism,
Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism — to
name a few. Still others are atheist and
have .devised their ethical codes
Joel
Ehrlich
Reader’s Opinion
unconstitutional.
independently. We must remember,
too, that regardless of how right one’s
own views seem, there are other
opinions and nobody but nobody is any
more correct than the next guy.
1 he concepts of God and modes of
worship range widely between the
countless sects. Lite fine points of ethics
also vary, but not without some major
common threads; it is wrong to steal, it
is wrong to treat other people unkindly
or unfairly, and yes, it is wrong to
murder another living human being.
I lowever, as we have already seen, it is
unclear exactly what constitutes a living
human being. This is the central
question of the abortion debate. And,
because it is largely a religious question,
there is no right answer.
1 he government needs to make laws
that enforce the universal moral truths
described above, and they would indeed
do well to use religions in general (note
the plural) as a guide. It is and ought to
be illegal to murder. Yet on the question
of abort ion, where there is such a great
difference of legitimate views, the issue
must be decided by individuals in
concert with their personal religious
beliefs. To restrict this choice in any way
is to elevate some religions above others.
That is wrong and thankfully it is strictly
Bv now you have no doubt figured
out that 1 am strongly pro-choice. Many
pro-lifers have pointed out that pro-life
does not mean anti-choice (that a
woman, in most cases, has options
before getting pregnant). It is then only
fair to allow me to assert that pro-choice
does not mean anti-life. I value all lives
as highly as anyone else, but I differ in
my concept of what is alive.
Nevertheless, I feel that abortion is an
undesirable procedure which is badly
abused, especially as a form of birth
control. I would like to see it disappear,
even if I do not find it morally wrong.
Notwithstanding, history suggests that
making abortion illegal will not make it
go away, and I maintain that making
abortion illegal is an attack on my
religious freedom, an unconstitutional
steppingstone towards theocracy. My
suggestion is that pro-choicers and pro
lifers alike stop the foolish arguing and
name-calling. Rather, we should work
together to improve America’s
deplorable social conditions so only a
few need to have abortions in the first
place.
Joel Ehrlich is a freshman
biochemistry major.
Before the people grant the
government some power, we must first
consider the possibility that the cure
may be worse than the disease.
When I first joined Amnesty
International, I still favored the death
penalty (AI opposes it). Month after
month I continued to hear how the
death penalty is abused in virtually
every country in the world where it is in
place. No government with the power of
death (including our own) has failed to
use it on innocent people. Many, many
innocent people. I finally realized that
this is inevitable: Give the government
power, and that power will eventually be
abused. This simple realization changed
my mind; 1 decided that the power of
life and death was too important to
entrust to the state.
Abolishing the death penalty means
that in some cases, the demands of
justice will remain incompletely
satisfied. But we must realize that this
remains true even if the death penaltil
used, and the victim cannot be brougtl
back to life in any case. Allowingthost|BY Ofi
convicted of capital crimes to live llfThe
^
All
fer B
|lace
behind bars means that those who arc p”” 77
innocent (as some are) can contmuetol
try to clear their name. As for the wont
that they may kill again, it is simply
solved by disallowing parole, few esq
from maximum security.
Don’t get me wrong: I shed no lean
for the Bundy’s or Ceausescu’softhis
world. My sympathy is reserved fortlit
families of tlie thousands of men and
women wrongfully hanged, shot or
fi ied. Allowing a cold-blooded
murderer like Bundy or a greedy
butcher like Ceausescu to live out the
rest of their lives in prison is a small
price to pay for saving the lives of maiit
innocents.
It’s a price we can well afford.
Jeff Farmer is a graduate studentin
mathematics.
Gl
Mail Call
y N;
)f Th
A i
fexa
Death penalty alternative unrealistic
EDITOR:
Mr. Arhos, your ideas for an alternativ e to the death penalty are interest
ing, but they are not realistic.
Instead of telling us how man) innocent people were exonerated sinct
1900, why not give us the statistics since July 2, 1976? Aftei all, that isthedatt
the Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty . Furthermore, exoneration
does not prove innocence, it is merely a stay of exet ution.
People who commit murder should be punished. W hat is the pmpei pun
ishment for a psychotic murderer who raped and mutilated \our wiles
corpse?
Life in prison doesn’t seem to work. I he punishment doesn’t lit thecrime.
Does putting a capital of fendei in prison foi life pay his debt to society!'
Lite money to keep him fed three meals a day , clothed and under armed
guard for the rest of his life must come from someone's pocket. Whatyottare
suggesting is that the victim's family foot the bill (through taxes).
You stated in vout editorial that some of the executions were cruel and in
humane. Your examples cited that the inmates mav have been alive as longas 1
ten minutes during the actual execution. If you want to insure a quickdeatli
then use a f iring squad. There is not a certain technique in which a capit;
fender can be executed without somebody claiming atrocities of mankind
Wi
|\&M
ersit
rogi
Da
nstit
haul
wo a
or oi
Alt
iest<
isit.
‘T
'isite
onta
who
fern
Me
By Dj
: 0f Th
Scott A. Finfer ’91
accompanied by 21 signatures
Who cares if murders suffer in death?
EDITOR:
1 would like to comment on Damon Arhos recent column on tfie deatli
penalty . I would like to begin by addressing the accounts ol prisoners suffer
ing too much. What about the person whose life was destroyed?
Your first example was of a prisoner who had convulsions lot eight min
utes while in the gas chamber. 1 he prisoner repeatedly hit his head on tlit
pole behind him.
Win does he deserve a humane death? Did you forget why he was there?!
doubt he was even conscious at the time.
The same goes for the prisoner who needed three electrical shocks toll
hini.'Was he even coherent after one burst ol 1900 volts? You did not sin
Journalists are not supposed to obscure facts to get the point across.
Also, lethal injection is painless. It is the same as taking a bottle of sleeping
pills.
1 he prisoner was probably screaming at the thought ol death. 1 wonderif
his victim did.
1 would also like to know if Mr. Arhos has ever heard “one nation, under
God” before.
In the Bible it is clear that the penalty for taking a life is death.
1 would like to Mr. Arhos a final question. In his infinite wisdom, can he
not find a more productive use of taxpayer’s dollars than feeding, c
and housing a murderer for life.
Th
| |n Br;
Bill Crawford ’92
accompanied by nine signatures
Editor’s note: In a Reader’s Opinion by D.A. Krause printed on Feb. 13,
the number of a parking lot that is empty most of the day was reported in
correctly.
The correct lot is Lot 46.
Have an opinion? Express it!
Lcltns to the editor should not exceed 300 words in length. The editorial staff reserves the right lu edit\tlltn
for style and length, hut will wake even effort to maintain the author's intent. There is no guamnltthl
letters submitted will be printed. Each letter must be signed and must include the classification, uddmid
. telephone number of the writer. All letters max be brought to 210 Herd McDonald, or sent to C/unpmMd
Stop 1111.
Adventures In Cartooning
by Don Atkinson Ji,
ates
The Battalion
(USPS 045 360)
Member oi
Texas Press Association
Southwest Journalism C-onlerence
The Battalion Editorial Board
Scot Walker, Editor
Monique Threadgill,
Managing Editor
Ellen Hobbs, Opinion Page Editor
Melissa Naumann. City Editor
Cindy MeMillian, Lisa Robertson,
News Editors
Richard Tijerina, Sports Editor
Fredrick D. Joe, Art Director
Mary-Lynne Rice, Lifestyles Editor
Editorial Policy
7 he Battalion is a non-profit, self-supporting
newspaper operated as a community service to
Texas V&M and Brvan-College Station.
Opinions expressed in The Battalion are
those ol the editorial board oi the author, and
do not necessarily represent the opinions of
Texas A&M administrators, faculty or the
Boat d of Regents.
The Battalion is published Monday through
Friday during Texas A&M regular semesters,
except for holiday and examination periods.
Mail subscriptions are $17.44 per semester,
$34.62 per school year and $36.44 per full y ear.
Advet tisipg rates furnished on request.
Our address: The Battalion, 230 Reed Mc
Donald, Texas A&M Tniveisitv, College Sta
tion, TX 77843-1 111.
Second class postage paid at College Station.
TX 77843.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to
The Battalion, 216 Reed McDonald. Texas
A&M Universitv. College Station TX 77843-
4111.