Death Penalty

A day of sadness and shame for the Asian-Oceanian region

There is surely no excuse for a a modern state: Asian,  European , African, American....and certainly not Oceanian...to support the death penalty

On a day when we are all concerned about the heaving casualties of great human tragedy in Nepal....our hearts are opened to  "a country like this......a  city like this" .
Our common humanity should remind us that we are citizens of a Common World. where  it is convenient to suggest we are privileged to live in security.

We will forget most likely about Sukumaran and Chan, executed this morning in Indonesia,......the stupid boys who became men in prison and then were slaughtered.

While there is some evidence to suggest that the 'ordinary' Australian community still has a hefty proportion of people who think it's OK to execute people.....if nothing else good has come out of this latest injustice in Indonesia it is that Australian political will appears to have been galvanised.
 against the death penalty. Equally well there is a serious issue about the way popular media has or has not aggravated this situation

One moderate commentator said this morning when the argument that "they had been rehabilitated" was again being put forward....'Well they were not there to be rehabilitated but to be......." and the conversation sort of tailored off.
I presume he was going to say punished!
Having been to Gaol in the last couple of weeks (here) I tried to talk about the process of reconciliation that the modern gaol is supposed to be on about. Mobilong Gaol seems to be doing pretty well in rehabilitating others.

Gaol is not just about punishment....though that is legitimate....we also should be about rehabilitation.

Both Chan and Sukumaran  appear to have been seriously and wonderfully rehabilitated...almost against all odds... there seems little reason to think that this is anything but genuine.

There are bigger questions too:  China continues to be the biggest executor . Dare we confront this powerful trading partner
The US, our most powerful ally,  is the most shameful and strident country participating in executions.  Where is our criticism of them?

There is much more to be said about this.

Prison versus gaol

It was a privilege last night to go to Mobilong "Correctional Facility"/ "Prison"/"Gaol or Jail".

It was another graduation service (the second of the week for me...the first being a University Graduation) but on this occasion for a group of about 20 prisoners in one of the State's prisons.
This is run by Kairos Prison Ministry. An ecumenical endeavour to prisoners, a short course, and weekly contact with those in jails. (we are still having a debate about jail  or gaol) 

The guys who did the course spoke about "what they had learnt" and "how they had changed". In some senses fairly trite questions...and the guys recognise this...but they roll with it.

Some of my observations:
These dot points have grown too long... I hope you read them all

• We had a good conversation in the car on the way home about the way language is used. We had all noted that the,  otherwise, very excellent speaker from the Dept. of Correctional Services used the lingo of her Department.  These were "offenders", and we and they  were told that Kairos was one step towards them getting back on the right track.  This is the language of the Department, I guess, but fairly heavy handed
• My first impression....and this is not the first time I have been in a gaol... as I looked at the security is that:  if this is 'medium and low security'  then what  is high security?  It all looked awful to me
• I was struck by the male membership of the Kairos team and supporters. This is not something that you always experience in the life of the church. It is good to see that  good men think this is valuable ministry
• My friend, Rob, had lured me by the assurance that the guys who would speak would be a  profound experience
• It was indeed,. Groups spoke...and then there was Open Mic ( as a person who does funerals I think this is a big mistake.) But today.......the groups Matthew, Mark, Luke and John....I wonder where those name came from.... and then (sometimes with a little reluctance) from individuals came very interesting reflections
• Most spoke about Forgiveness.  The guys spoke about three things:   How they needed to seek forgiveness.  Well yes!  
• how they needed to forgive...well that's a bit more challenging and complex...they are not only Offenders but are also Victims....some of them were able to even articulate that their families of origin didn't really support and/or love them.    This is bitter stuff. But they needed to forgive... the failures of those who should have done better
• They spoke mainly about the need to forgive themselves .....pretty deep stuff for guys who we may so often think of as hopeless!
• Finally,  and this is not everything I thought,  an APY guy played guitar and  about the Cross. he sang (I am told) in the Pitjantjara language (Were I a producer I would be signing him up today!!)
• I found myself pained, as one who has artistic proclivities, what do you do if you are denied the outlet of your life.   If there is no gyuitar in your room. If you cannot pen the poem that is in your heart (my particular issue)
• I am thankful to shake the hands of those guys...who had to return to lockup

These dot points have grown too long... I hope you read them

To die or not to die.

As if the euthanasia and/or capital punishment debate weren't complex enough; pro-death advocate Philip Nitschke this week suggested that Tasmanian mass murderer Martin Bryant who is in jail "never to be released" is a prime candidate for some form of euthanasia. (see here).
I am not one who thinks that Nitschke should be dismissed out of hand because his views are outspoken or extreme (or more accurately because I largely disagree with them!) but I think he has done nothing to advance his cause by making this sort of comment.
It will actually expose for a lot more people just how defective and slippery his arguments are.
For me the issue about euthanasia is more about the downward slide.
That is, once you admit it, no matter how strong the safeguards are that you put in place, how then do you actually stop these safeguards being weakened as time goes on.
History would show that humankind, being what it is, we tend to slide downhill and strict safeguards get weaker. Some would think this is a good thing, I don't.
Curious argument
Nitschke's argument in the case of Bryant, is that Bryant has tried to kill himself unsuccessfully on several occasions, to continue to allow him to languish in the penal system is akin to torture and is therefore cruel punishment. Because Bryant is 'never to be released', the possibility of his rehabilitation whilst in jail is obviously being denied. What then is the purpose of his incarceration?
This raises the question about what we are doing when we send people to jail any way.
Are we trying to punish them, make them suffer or rehabilitate them. Or some combination of all three?
This is where I think Nitschke has exposed himself.

His unremitting advocacy for euthanasia has essentially been about relieving the suffering of those who are going to die. It is about a dying person making a choice, not about having the choice made for them. Nor is it that a person who is depressed about, or fed up with, or just plain bored with life being allowed to top themselves!
While Nitschke and others may feel that it is OK that euthanasia is purely a personal or individual decision, most people in our society don't. Euthanasia is for the dying, not the bored.
The particular case of Bryant, who committed one of the most heinous crimes imaginable, only further confuses the issue.
What do you do with a man who mows down tourists, adults and children unremittingly?
Most people are happy to let him languish in jail. As a country we believe that the death sentence is not appropriate. Not all of us by any means accept this view.
But that is where we stand today.
We will not for example extradite people to countries where it is likely that they will be subject to the death penalty.
While we may be drawn to the idea that Bryant should be executed. And I am not! We actually say, we do not believe that taking people's lives is a value that we want to incorporate into our nation's world view.
Martin Bryant, however deservedly, should not be allowed to be executed even if he wants to be.
We do not want to be the sort of society that has capital punishment. Why should a mass murderer be allowed to flout that? Why should Nitschke's euthanasia agenda be allowed to flow into this complex area too?
This is my point. The slippery slope.
While some may have sympathy with a view of euthanasia that hastens the end of a life of pain which is headed irrevocably towards an immediate death, most of us are scandalised by the idea that euthanasia might be used as a tool of social control.
Misfits like Bryant might want to die, as a society we do not believe that it is appropriate that suicide of those who are not terminally ill should be sanctioned, and certainly it should not be assisted.
The question is not whether it "could" be done, of course it could, but whether it "should" be.