Hypothetical for anti-death penalty advocates

[Mechaman]

I'm including myself in this too.

Let us say that it is the 1950's and you are a staunchly religious Quaker who abhors the death penalty.  Let us also presume that you are strongly pro-Civil Rights and have even participated in Civil Rights rides through the South.

Now, let us presume that in some Deep Southern state like Alabama, South Carolina, or even Arkansas or Tennessee that a couple of white men bet up and then lynch a black man in a town square.  The case lasts for over a year, in which time the presiding judge has been replaced by a well known liberal who has declared that "as God as my witness, I will do whatever is in my authority to have these two bastards hang by their necks until they stop kicking.  Even if I have to face a firing squad the next day."  The judge, who got into his office mostly through family connections (he comes from a well established political dynasty), had been stonewalled in similar cases before by the previous Governor of the state, who was a diehard segregationist and white supremacist.  However, in the previous year that Governor was defeated in the Democratic Primary by a humble populist who played down racial issues.  The current Governor has defended Segregation in the past, but it's not certain how he would view activities like the lynch mob which are an institution in the state.
One day his views become perfectly clear, as with his hand on the bible and humbly admitting how hard of a decision it was, he had signed the death warrants for the two lynchers, saying "no murderer is above the law."  The two white men are dragged out to a couple of gallows where they are hung. Civil Rights activists around the country are divided on the event, many see it as signal that finally justice and equality before the law has been enforced by a Governor of a Jim Crow state against strong opposition.  Others, however, see it as, regardless of it's intentions, a moral wrong that in no way would ever right the original lynching.

Watching the news on the tv. . . . . . how would you feel?  Would you for a moment drop your staunchly anti-capital punishment views to hail what many consider a victory for Civil Rights?  Or would you stand by your view that violent force is immoral, and ultimately a violation of the Civil Right to life?

If this needs to be in the General Discussion board I'm okay with that.  I just thought that since this was a kind of personal philosophy thing I thought of today at work that it should go here.

[tik 🪀✨]

I'd stay steadfast in my opposition. You can still send the message to society that racism is no longer acceptable while using the two defendants as the example by locking them up.

On the other hand, I wouldn't really care about their deaths. It's like that with awful people sometimes.  I'd be more disgusted with the characters and political situation that played parts in the fiasco. That's the thing about being anti-capital punishment; you don't typically feel empathy for the worst offenders who receive it, you care about the families of the prisoner, the possibility of innocence, the permanence of it and the hypocrisy.

[Mechaman]

I'd stay steadfast in my opposition. You can still send the message to society that racism is no longer acceptable while using the two defendants as the example by locking them up.

On the other hand, I wouldn't really care about their deaths. It's like that with awful people sometimes.  I'd be more disgusted with the characters and political situation that played parts in the fiasco. That's the thing about being anti-capital punishment; you don't typically feel empathy for the worst offenders who receive it, you care about the families of the prisoner, the possibility of innocence, the permanence of it and the hypocrisy.

I was thinking much the same myself.

[Randy Bobandy]

I'd stay steadfast in my opposition. You can still send the message to society that racism is no longer acceptable while using the two defendants as the example by locking them up.

On the other hand, I wouldn't really care about their deaths. It's like that with awful people sometimes.  I'd be more disgusted with the characters and political situation that played parts in the fiasco. That's the thing about being anti-capital punishment; you don't typically feel empathy for the worst offenders who receive it, you care about the families of the prisoner, the possibility of innocence, the permanence of it and the hypocrisy.

I was thinking much the same myself.

I couldn't have worded this in much a better way.

[Dr. Cynic]

I'd stay steadfast in my opposition. You can still send the message to society that racism is no longer acceptable while using the two defendants as the example by locking them up.

On the other hand, I wouldn't really care about their deaths. It's like that with awful people sometimes.  I'd be more disgusted with the characters and political situation that played parts in the fiasco. That's the thing about being anti-capital punishment; you don't typically feel empathy for the worst offenders who receive it, you care about the families of the prisoner, the possibility of innocence, the permanence of it and the hypocrisy.

You put this perfectly.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Opposing death penalty on a general level does not imply feeling bad for every person who is executed. Yes, I've experienced neutral to positive feelings about death sentences involving people such as war criminals and the like, all while maintaining that they should rather have been jailed for life.

[Mr. Illini]

As an individual sitting at home, I would keep the same opinion that I hold now: it is immoral. However, as Governor the issue would be even more difficult for me. In a time of such racial tension, failure to sign their death sentences would be seen as being soft on racism, even if it was cited with best intentions.

That is where the real difficulty would be for me.

[pbrower2a]

For good reason the well-organized judiciary has no use for the brutal lynch mob that offers no rationality, no defense of the accused, and no appeal. Court findings are subject to revision in the event of an error. Lynch mobs offer no chance for rectification after the fact.

[Mechaman]

As an individual sitting at home, I would keep the same opinion that I hold now: it is immoral. However, as Governor the issue would be even more difficult for me. In a time of such racial tension, failure to sign their death sentences would be seen as being soft on racism, even if it was cited with best intentions.

That is where the real difficulty would be for me.

Illini,

That is a very interesting hypothetical, and now I will propose my second question for all of you:

Now imagine that you are the Governor of the state in question and the judge has handed you the death sentences.  A practicing Catholic, you have strong reservations about the death penalty and strongly believe in the right of life.  However, you have for all of your life held progressive views on race (though you keep those to yourself, for fear of being outed before you gain office), been opposed to Jim Crow, and don't want to send a wrong message to people that lynching is alright.

The sentences are on your desk, do you sign them?  If so why?  If not, why?

[Antonio the Sixth]

As an individual sitting at home, I would keep the same opinion that I hold now: it is immoral. However, as Governor the issue would be even more difficult for me. In a time of such racial tension, failure to sign their death sentences would be seen as being soft on racism, even if it was cited with best intentions.

That is where the real difficulty would be for me.

Illini,

That is a very interesting hypothetical, and now I will propose my second question for all of you:

Now imagine that you are the Governor of the state in question and the judge has handed you the death sentences.  A practicing Catholic, you have strong reservations about the death penalty and strongly believe in the right of life.  However, you have for all of your life held progressive views on race (though you keep those to yourself, for fear of being outed before you gain office), been opposed to Jim Crow, and don't want to send a wrong message to people that lynching is alright.

The sentences are on your desk, do you sign them?  If so why?  If not, why?

Provided that my Lieutenant Governor is also progressive on race, I'd resign and let him sign the sentence. Yeah, I'm a coward who hates responsibility.

[Mechaman]

As an individual sitting at home, I would keep the same opinion that I hold now: it is immoral. However, as Governor the issue would be even more difficult for me. In a time of such racial tension, failure to sign their death sentences would be seen as being soft on racism, even if it was cited with best intentions.

That is where the real difficulty would be for me.

Illini,

That is a very interesting hypothetical, and now I will propose my second question for all of you:

Now imagine that you are the Governor of the state in question and the judge has handed you the death sentences.  A practicing Catholic, you have strong reservations about the death penalty and strongly believe in the right of life.  However, you have for all of your life held progressive views on race (though you keep those to yourself, for fear of being outed before you gain office), been opposed to Jim Crow, and don't want to send a wrong message to people that lynching is alright.

The sentences are on your desk, do you sign them?  If so why?  If not, why?

Provided that my Lieutenant Governor is also progressive on race, I'd resign and let him sign the sentence. Yeah, I'm a coward who hates responsibility.

* Shotgun Socialism! puts on Moderate Hero cap

Yeah, that sounds like a pretty good course of action for me too, haha.

[Repub242]

In both cases I would stand firm in my opposition to the death penalty.