death penalty

[Douglas <dougwils@moscow.com>]

Dear visionaries,

We have been asked about the contradictory positions taken, not only by
absolutists, but by Christian absolutists. The example cited was the
death penalty. But the example is poorly drawn. Everyone supports the
death penalty. It is another example of "not whether, but
which." Do we execute the serial murderer, or do we
"execute" his next victim because he is still around to
perpetrate such crimes? So I support the death penalty for certain crimes
bacause I prefer to have fair trials precede the executions I would
support. I oppose the death penalty for five-year-old girls riding their
bicycles, East African workers in aspirin factories who gave their lives
so that somebody's sex scandal could get off the front page, and children
in utero.

But this clash of interpretations between absolutist Christians does not
alter my questions that I have posted to this list at all. Rather, it
reinforces them. Everyone is in this same position, and everyone has to
answer the same questions. Living together in society means that some
people will always be the recipients of coercion, up to and including
fatal coercion. The only question before the house concerns which
category of people they will be, and what
"absolutist-enough-to-coerce" standard will be applied to
them.