>In regard to what this man did to the 4-year old girl, yes, I say put him to death. What could be the argument against it?
>
>Oh, there are plenty who say that the man is sick and needs our help, or say that putting a man to death for killing a four year old makes us no better than a country that stones a woman to death for allegedly committing adultery.
>
>I can respect those (e.g. Tracy, Alan) who have offered up some issues with capital punishment. I don't necessarily agree with all their points, but at least I know they're not a bunch of bleeding hearts. But some of the other crap I've heard up here on the topic really falls under the category of "intellectual pornography".

I replied to Cecil that I was going to state my opinion and then get out, which remains my plan. Your post seems to implicate me directly enough that I am going to respond to it anyway.

First of all, I am not a bleeding heart. The sicko you used as your launching pad in this thread sickens me as much as he does you. He is scum and I have little hope for his rehabilitation. I have a lot of sympathy for the downtrodden in our relentlessly upwardly mobile society, guilty as charged (!), but little or none at all for those who take specific actions which are beyond the pale of human civility. Let him rot in prison. (Uh, you consider that a wimpy punishment, especially for someone who killed a 4 year old girl?)

Where we diverge is the heart of the capital punishment debate -- is it acceptable to kill another human being? (Excluding military combat and self defense). I do not believe it is. Not looking for cover but look at the list of countries that allow capital punishment and the list of those who don't. I know which list I want us to be on, and not just for their approval.

The knotty core of the debate has always seemed to me an unswallowable paradox. "You have done the worst thing possible, you have killed another human being. And for this we are going to kill you."

Anger and the desire for vengeance are in our DNA, in mine as much as yours. Where we diverge is on the acceptable responses. That we are living in an angry country in troubled times does not sideline the same eternal issues Plato and Socrates grappled with. It doesn't make wrong things right.

This is not an attack and you should not take it as such. We are just in profound disagreement on this issue and I wanted to explain my position in something other than a 10 word quote bubble. (Is that what they're called, those things in cartoons?)