An edi­to­r­i­al in the Baptist Standard, pub­lished in Texas, recent­ly called for repeal­ing the death penal­ty in the next leg­isla­tive ses­sion. Among the rea­sons cit­ed by the paper for end­ing cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment were prin­ci­ples of reli­gious faith, the risk of exe­cut­ing inno­cent defen­dants, its inef­fec­tive­ness in deter­ring crime, the high costs of pros­e­cu­tion, and its unfair­ness in affect­ing the poor and peo­ple of col­or. The edi­to­r­i­al quot­ed the recent report from the National Research Council crit­i­ciz­ing the ​“fun­da­men­tal flaws in the research” about deter­rence and dis­cour­ag­ing reliance on such stud­ies to sup­port the death penal­ty. The paper con­clud­ed, “[T]he pos­si­bil­i­ty — and almost cer­tain like­li­hood — the state peri­od­i­cal­ly exe­cutes inno­cent peo­ple should pro­pel cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment beyond the pale of pos­si­bil­i­ty.… Since we know the courts can make griev­ous mis­takes, how can we say we val­ue life and per­pet­u­ate a pro­gram that some­times kills inno­cent peo­ple?” Read full editorial below.

EDITORIAL: Pull the switch on the death penal­ty
By Marv Knox, Editor, Baptist Standard

Gov. Rick Perry should place a mora­to­ri­um on exe­cu­tions, and the next ses­sion of the Texas Legislature should vote to abol­ish the death penalty.

Reasoned oppo­si­tion to cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment is rising:

• No reli­able research sup­ports the claim that cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment deters mur­der, accord­ing to an analy­sis of dozens of stud­ies con­duct­ed across 36 years.

“Fundamental flaws in the research we reviewed make it of no use in answer­ing the ques­tion of whether the death penal­ty affects homi­cide rates,” Daniel Nagin, a Carnegie Mellon University pro­fes­sor who head­ed up the review for the National Research Council, told USA Today.

• National sup­port for the death penal­ty has decreased to 61 per­cent, the low­est lev­el in four decades, a Gallup poll showed.

And giv­en a choice between cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment and life with­out parole, less than a major­i­ty of respon­dents favor exe­cu­tion, a sim­i­lar survey indicated.

• Seventeen states have over­turned the death penal­ty. Connecticut abol­ished the prac­tice last month. Illinois, where the Innocence Project proved numer­ous false con­vic­tions, got rid of it last year. California will con­sid­er a ref­er­en­dum this fall.

• Tepid imple­men­ta­tion of the death penal­ty seems to reveal a grow­ing dis­taste for the practice.

Connecticut exe­cut­ed only one con­vict in 52 years. California, which hous­es 725 inmates on Death Row, has not exe­cut­ed any­one since 2006. Even Texas, the tra­di­tion­al leader in cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment, exe­cut­ed 13 peo­ple last year. That’s the low­est lev­el in 15 years, and the state is on pace to exe­cute 10 inmates this year.

The case for elim­i­nat­ing the death penal­ty can be made for sev­er­al compelling reasons.

First and fore­most, the pos­si­bil­i­ty — and almost cer­tain like­li­hood — the state peri­od­i­cal­ly exe­cutes inno­cent peo­ple should pro­pel cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment beyond the pale of pos­si­bil­i­ty. Dallas County leads the nation in prov­ing wrong­ful con­vic­tions — 30 in the last 11 years. Since we know the courts can make griev­ous mis­takes, how can we say we val­ue life and per­pet­u­ate a pro­gram that some­times kills innocent people?

Second — a corol­lary to the first point — cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment dis­pro­por­tion­ate­ly tar­gets the poor and peo­ple of color.

Third, since the death penal­ty has not been proven effec­tive in deter­ring crime, elim­i­nat­ing it would not be expect­ed to result in an increase in violent acts.

Fourth, cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment is inor­di­nate­ly expen­sive, and the mon­ey can be put to bet­ter pur­pos­es. Analysis of the California sys­tem shows the death penal­ty costs that state $184 mil­lion per year. Opponents sug­gest elim­i­nat­ing cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment could save the state mil­lions in legal fees and free mil­lions more to inves­ti­gate unsolved crimes.

Fifth, abol­ish­ing the death penal­ty would cur­tail pro­tract­ed agony — for every­body. Capital pun­ish­ment cas­es often drag on for decades, with repeat­ed hear­ings, appeals and court pro­ceed­ings reopen­ing the wounds for vic­tims’ families.

Sixth, crim­i­nals con­vict­ed of heinous crimes still will receive severe pun­ish­ment, and soci­ety still will be pro­tect­ed. Life with­out parole is enough to tor­ment any­one. And per­ma­nent impris­on­ment will pre­vent inmates from harm­ing oth­er innocent people.

Seventh, life in prison extends the oppor­tu­ni­ty for re-demp­tion. No, the sal­va­tion of a mur­der­er does not bring the vic­tim back to life. But it does restore one soul to eter­nal life. God’s grace can reach even the most wicked. And while wrong­ful­ly con­vict­ed inmates even­tu­al­ly may go free, you can’t res­ur­rect the exe­cut­ed who were convicted falsely.

Eighth, it’s incon­ceiv­able Jesus would exe­cute a crim­i­nal. As Connecticut Gov. Dan Malloy says: ​“In the New Testament, the one place where Jesus talks about the death penal­ty, he says, ​‘Let he who is with­out sin cast the first stone.’ When I’ve reflect­ed on the death penal­ty, the real­i­ty is I fre­quent­ly pon­der that passage.”

Marv Knox is edi­tor of the Baptist Standard. Visit his blog at www​.bap​tist​stan​dard​.com.

(M. Knox, ​“EDITORIAL: Pull the switch on the death penal­ty,” Baptist Standard, edi­to­r­i­al, May 11, 2012). See Religion. Read more Editorials and New Voices on the death penalty.

Citation Guide