Grievance 34 - Killing
The U.S. Constitution Bill of Rights set forth an imprecise provision on
the matter of the death penalty for crimes;
Article VIII - "Excessive bail shall not
be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments
inflicted."
Punishment by death, then made legal by federal and some state
governments for certain crimes, was not regarded as excessive even to
religionists who, while declaring the nation's roots were in the Bible,
evaded the clear contradiction and violation of the precise Commandment
"Thou shalt not kill".
Great debates occurred over whether the threat of taking a criminals
life was a deterrent against crime by others, but it was never proven
statistically. Most often, the act of murder was an emotional outburst
of the moment, and many prominent people such as The Dalai Lama argued
against it;
",,,it is always possible for criminals
to improve and that by its very
finality, the death penalty contradicts
this."
A fundamental contradiction of the death penalty, the act of a
collective group calling itself "government" taking a human life, was
that the same group made it illegal for an individual to do so, even as
punishment, which was an illogical double-standard from the perspective
of conscience.
Entering the 21st century, growing numbers of people regarded killing of
human beings under any circumstances as a mark of an unsophisticated,
revengeful, spiritually-dead and negative society, with no hope for
human correction and, therefore, unworthy of calling itself civilized.
Historically, a government ban on the death penalty would have saved
such leaders as Jesus and Socrates, as well as many common individuals
over the centuries who were later found to be innocent of the crime for
which they were killed.
With an AUTHENTIC CONSTITUTION in harmony with the natural
Cosmic Laws of the universe, and producing High Moral Values and
Democratic Ideals, the life of all separately-functioning human beings is
protected, and criminals are confined until corrected.
Back