I've always thought it interesting that people who "forgive" their child's or family member's killer are somehow thought of as better than those who want to see the murderer executed.

I personally think a person like Maureen Faulkner is worthy of our praise as well. She has fought the "Mumia is innocent" crowd ever step of the way since the murder of her husband.

Murder victim's families, of course, have to do what they feel they have to do.
 

Power of forgiveness and love is always going to be greater than revenge and more hatred.
 

So Harry, Hector Black is better than Maureen Faulkner? Is that what you're saying? Is she wrong for what she does?
 

Hector and Maureen are absolutely equal in the eyes of God. How they choose to respond is very different obviously. My heart tells me Hector's response is the better one. Everyone has to make that call on their own I suppose.
 

Mumia Abu Jamal does not admit his guilt.
 

Your focus lies solely with those convicted. Have you ever once questioned yourself, as a taxpaying member of society? I believe that is why Harry believes the way he does.
 

The point of my post about Mumia is that forgiveness usually comes after the "forgivee" admits he or she was wrong. Mumia does not admit guilt.

Have I ever "questioned myself"? Hmmmm. Of course, that's part of life, my man. If you don't look back at things you did or said, you'll never become better. I will note that some of your posts, Ike, show the opposite. Many are ad hominem. Many are so clearly over the top, e.g., that idealism on the part of the AGs is based on ignorance and bureaucracy. That shows an inflexibility and a closed mind. You guys show an unwillingness to even consider whether an effective death penalty deters crime and a slavish devotion to the idea that lethal injection tortures, when even Justice Stevens was lauding Kentucky's case. You guys use misleading info about "innocence". You toss around allegations of racism, with no concern for the reputations of those involved with the decision to sentence someone to death.

I remember one post you had, about how Workman's pizza for the homeless was going to resound through the ages . . . . I remember reading that and wondering if you guys really believe that. If you do, you need some introspection.
 

I should have been clearer. I was asking if you have questioned yourself in the guise of capital punishment. That is the reason many abolitionists feel the way they do because as members of society we do not desire to be a part of the process.

Then you begin ranting. I'm sure there have been times when I have used ad hominem, displayed ignorance, been over the top, or shown closed mindedness. However, I have done so under my name, ike, Isaac Kimes. I own all of those mistakes and I would like to fix them.

You are anonymous. End of discussion.
 

What difference does it make that I choose to be anonymous. You can ban me, if you choose; it's your blog. I think, though, I make it a little more interesting than it would otherwise be.

I am not sure it's accurate to describe my post as ranting? Is it a rant to point out that your comments about the AGs in the House case are over the top? Upon what do you base your belief that they are ignorant and succumbing to a bureaucratic mindset? Is it a rant to point out that you don't even entertain the possibility that the death penalty deters murder?

As for capital punishment, I don't really question my conclusion that murderers deserve to die. (There would be a lot more executions if it were up to me.) I do understand the innocence argument.

In any event, I think that what gets under your skin is that I reject your moral superiority in such an in your face manner. I question your use of misleading statistics about innocence (Query: Is Timothy Hennis innocent?) I question your simplistic cries of racism. (I noted the fig leaf in your post today about race and the justice system--or should I say "just-us" system, a la Barack Obama?).

I think you're used to people conceding the moral high ground to you. I don't. In fact, I find a lot of the tactics of abolitionists morally bankrupt.
 

You don't get under my skin. Would you like to know what does? The fact that all of Tennessee's death row could not afford their own attorneys. The fact that the system will not acknowledge that there are flaws and furthermore make no attempt to fix them. Maybe the death penalty deters murder. It is possible. But the system is so screwed up that I don't think that we'll ever know.

If you knew anything about organizing in a Southern state than you would know that taking the moral high ground as you put it accomplishes nothing. I'm sure I've been morally superior on the blog, IT IS A BLOG. I'd bank on the fact that you live in a Northern state. So you are inundated with uber-liberals and those who preach the morality of the issue. You think that strategy works when I'm talking to a church group in Cleveland, TN? But you would know nothing about that.

And you know what, it does matter that you are anonymous because you hide cowardly behind a veil. The man behind the curtain. You can spout off whatever you want, but you have no accountability. It reminds me of our death penalty system. The only people being held accountable are those that are executed.
 

It's funny no one ever posed as being morally superior yet anonymous thinks that they are. Anonymous why would you think that unless your heart of hearts is telling you that's true but your brain is rebelling. Seems like you might need some time to really reflect on what you really do believe.
 

Guys, when people like Ike write that their idealism comes from truth and that others get their idealism from ignorance, I'd think it's safe to say that people are acting as if they are morally superior.

In any event, why am I a coward? Because I post on a blog anonymously?

In any event, if the death penalty does deter murder, then you have to consider that this moratorium imposed by the Supreme Court is killing people.
 

I was wrong to say that folks get their idealism from ignorance. That was an unfounded and irresponsible statement.

Sure, your posting anonymously makes you a coward.

"If the death penalty does deter murder"

IF, big IF there. No need to say anything else.
 

Were you also wrong to characterize my post as a "rant"?