Death penalty choice comes down to morality
I read with interest Sunday’s editorial on getting rid of the death penalty (“It’s time for Florida to examine justice system, get rid of the death penalty,” Nov. 24). I agree with the concept. However one line in the article jumped out at me: “The morality of the death penalty is a personal call.” I could not disagree more. The editorial points out the inequities of the judicial system, and yet would, apparently, leave such inequities free to thrive in the arena of the “personal call.”
The problem is one of right and wrong. Until we can agree on what is right, and what is wrong, our system of defending certain behaviors while punishing others will continue to be erratic and unfair. John Adams, our second president, said: “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
What is needed, therefore, is an established code of morality and ethics the people can collectively live by. Selective morality, and selective enforcement of what is perceived to be law, will render the law invalid.
I agree with the premise that the death
penalty should be eliminated. But I also observe a “moral compass” that says “Thou shalt not kill.” That concept renders abortion equally abhorrent. Until we can agree on what is right, and what is wrong, we cannot hope to correct the inadequacies of our justice system. Warren Wright Lakeland