Is the death penalty morally acceptable in today’s society?
How can it be? It is a misnomer. A penalty both grammatically and morally reprehensible.
In my book, albeit a somewhat diminutive one, state-sanctioned murder is weak. It certainly does nothing to address the underlying cause that rehabilitation is supposed to. The act of execution should be as unpalatable as cannibalism or following Collingwood yet it continues protected by weak men and weak nations. Ok, in fairness that was hardly the most qualitative statement but is justly deserved by the small man currently steering the good ship Indonesia.
Even the Indonesian government itself is extremely vocal in its efforts to persuade other similarly backwoods (not backwards, although applicable too) nations to grant clemency and not execute Indonesian nationals on death row, but at the same time unfathomably unwavering in its stubborn refusal to repeal this archaic law or offer clemency to a couple of obviously rehabilitated prisoners. This should make the definition of hypocrisy abundantly clear, even for the most intellectually-challenged.
Given this obstinate attitude, I refuse to support state-sanctioned premeditated murder and in an effort to also avoid harmful colourants, I actively read the labels of everything I purchase and whenever I read anything related to Bali or Indonesia, I reject with disgust and choose an alternative. In fact, I go so far as to replace the product as far back on the shelf and as hidden as possible. Furthermore, I will never take my family to Bali or mainland Indonesia and will proactively discourage anyone and everyone from visiting. I have heard the oft unintelligent argument that boycotting this duplicitous and contrary nation would only harm the average common man trying to scrape a meagre living. Well, tough titties! If the common man wants to make a living from tourism, maybe he should lobby the government for the cessation of legalised revenge.
Let us be perfectly clear, there is NO documented evidence that the death penalty works. It does not, in any perceivable way, shape or form prevent crime or act as a deterrent in modern society. In fact, the precise opposite may be true (McClellan, G., 1961 US). Just ask the retards employing Sharia Law today. Even they will tell you that while they love a good stoning, amputation and execution as much as the next backwoods nation, they will concede an upward trend in rape, murder and trite reality shows.
The death penalty is called a punishment but what is the point of administering a punishment if there is no perceivable positive outcome? It is infinitely more senseless to execute a prisoner rehabilitated by a system designed for incarceration and rehabilitation! You are most certainly not punishing the criminal; Bang! You’re dead! Lesson learned! That makes no sense.
Let us call it what it is; vengeance.
Legal vengeance solidifies social solidarity against those who break the law and is the ‘acceptable’ alternative to the private revenge of the victim or aggrieved.
The death penalty is as ill-conceived and outdated as it is immoral.
Next week we discuss state-sanctioned torture, condoned by the Internationally-viewed, piss-weak president (The) Joko Widodo.