Friday, March 04, 2005
On the Death Penalty for Juveniles
"Juveniles are less mature than adults and, no matter how heinous their crimes, they are not among 'the worst offenders' who deserve to die."So claims the Supreme Court, applying a flawed moral justification to statutes and jury verdicts handed out in dozens of states across the U.S. Statutes and jury verdicts determined by elected officials and the people themselves.
I agree with the statement inasmuch as juveniles are less mature than adults. But I disagree that no matter what the crime, no matter how many lives have been destroyed, shattered or prematurely ended by the actions of the juvenile, "they are not amount 'the worst offenders' who deserve to die."
That's a broad, sweeping statement. The Supreme Court, however, neglects to correlate this decision with their ruling in Roe v. Wade. In that case, it was determined that a woman has a "Constitutional right" to terminate the life of an unborn child in her uterus, even if it's only for matters of convenience.
So apparently there is a crime that is heinous enough, that offends enough, for a child to be put to death. The crime? Conception due to the conscious and willing actions of two people other than the child itself.
What fascinating moral guidance we receive from our high court!