why i can't oppose the death penalty in all cases

[starroute]

103. And one more point occurs to me

I think my basic position is that killing people who are helpless and at your mercy is *wrong* -- no matter what the circumstances.

This means that the soldier was doing wrong to kill the Afghan villagers. But it also means that our government would be profoundly wrong to kill the soldier once he is in custody and incapable of doing further harm.

If you believe one, you have to believe the other. I can't see it any other way.

And if you agree with my line of argument, you also have to accept that to execute the soldier would be to some degree to validate what he did -- at least to the extent to saying that there are circumstances under which it is acceptable to kill helpless people.

Traditional religious thought might say that there is a difference and that it has to do with the question of innocence -- that the Afghan villages were innocent and the soldier was not. But I can't buy that. The villagers could have been harboring terrorists for all we know -- and that would still not justify their killing. And our own government has the blood of millions on its hands -- including those same villagers, through the policies which sent the soldier back into combat when he was obviously unfit.

Oddly enough, it seems that in the end, the only conclusion I can reach is the inverse of the alleged statement by the 13th century bishop who ordered the massacre of the Albigensians: "Let them all live. God will sort them out."