Facts don’t lie
President’s do!

Maybe you’re raising another point, that Saddam was denied due process. I might or might not agree on that, but it seemed there was a sincere effort to “do it right”, despite the surrounding events and disruptive attitudes on display.

When something reaches this level of “horrendousness”, everything attached to it is surreal. It’s not easy to compare it to what should happen in a civil or “typical” criminal case.

respectfully

I don’t think “being for/against capital punishment” is one of the black and white issues at all. More about that later. I am willing to distinguish “crimes against humanity” (which can be defined) and have that be subject to the death penalty whereas all others would not be.

Among the things that would distinguish this would be: person who by virtue of having been granted, or simply taking, the power of a “ruler” and who uses that position and state powers to systematically kill and maim those subjected to that rule for any purpose including: raw preservation of that power, to enrich oneself and followers, suppression of dissent, or perceived revenge, “shall be punished by death”.

Perhaps if I believed in Heaven and Hell, I would be content that he would be punished the hands of God. I don’t, so that isn’t a satisfactory outcome (for me). I contend he and those others who fit the “crimes against humanity” definition should be subject to the most severe punishment that can be meted out. If it could be shown life imprisonment in solitary confinement with no medical attention would be a more odious punishment, then I would support that.

About Saddam in particular, he could have surrendered on behalf of those in his cause and renounced his genocidal methods, he could have taken his own life, or could have been killed in combat since he was commander of all who killed and tortured in his name. Those things would probably have had the same proximal outcome (death), but he chose to remain the unrepentent brutalitarian fraud, claiming he deserved to remain a leader of those he victimized and their relatives and associates, right up to his ultimate demise. This takes him completely beyond sympathy, and into a category almost without company.

About the “black and whiteness” of one’s standing on the death penalty, can we explore that a bit? Society (or “the state” if you prefer) makes gray area life and death determinations constantly. I will limit this to but one area but there could be hundreds if you think deeply about it. The state decides how much alcohol a person can have in his/her system before he/she is too impaired to drive. If the limit were “zero” fewer people would die. The state decides how fast individuals are allowed to drive on every mile of roadway. If the limit were lowered to 1/2 the current amount, fewer people would be killed in auto accidents. The state decides what condition a vehicle must be in before it can be driven on a public roadway. If those standards were toughened to “perfect” brakes and tires and headlights, etc., fewer would be killed. These are examples of where “we” decide what measures are justified to preserve human life; it’s all gray.

I am willing to let the majority decide what the state should say about the death penalty, just as I accept the state’s right to enact other laws that ultimately doom some of us to die “prematurely”. The fact that the death penalty is rare is an indication that most people draw the line in a particular place. But, I believe “we” have a right to draw that line somewhere. And I would make sure that the line is drawn such that a person like Saddam Hussein is on the “other side” of it. I would make sure the wrong side of that line does NOT ever include people who are wrongly accused, people who may have done something because they “snapped”, people whose circumstances in life warped them to the point where they may have just been predetermined to be antisocial in spite of all help we could provide them, people whose conviction was decided on anything other than evidence that all the world can see, etc. In other words, almost everyone would be on the “preserve life” side of that line.

Letting one case of ‘its OK in this situation’ allows for 6 billion interpretations of when its OK to make exceptions, i.e., your exception carries no greater weight than anyone else’s exemptions such as the nazi that thinks Jews should not exist. Whether individually or collectively, any justification for intertional murder is wrong and dangerous.

Which leads to the unease of Hussein’s execution not being from some emotional connection to Hussein. The unease arises from the prospect of our fellow humans predisposition to rationalize and justify state sponsored murder.
.

Terry Ott @
158

Dear Jane (and others),
There were deaths all over the world on December 29, 2006, by humans against other humans in conflict (personal or for a “cause”), or in the commission of a crime, or by negligence, or by a careless act, or a mean-spirited one.

We grieve when those close to us is one whose life is snuffed out (no matter how). We sympathize when a good person is lost to us. We are insecure when an important person whom we have come to depend on is suddenly gone. We worry when the circumstances are such that “it could have been me” or someone we cherish. We are devastated when it is someone whose life is intertwined with ours.

What is it about Saddam Hussein that should cause any of those reactions from someone outside of his family and inner circle upon his death?

All death is a negative experience for someone like me, who has no belief in an afterlife and who rejects the notion that “it’s God’s will” for lack of evidence. EXCEPT in a case like that of Saddam Hussein.

Many (most?) people in the world do not favor capital punishment, and I am among them. But there are circumstances where that conviction can be set aside for a moment — when the knowledge that a person so defiled the glorious concept of “being”, so desecrated what it means to participate in life as a peer human, that his removal from the earth is acceptable. More than acceptable for some, acceptable for others, and unacceptable for a very small number of us for reasons that are probably “personal”.

I’m not celebrating Saddam’s early departure from planet Earth. But I am very easily accepting it as an outcome deserved by the very worst among us, by (perhaps) one in a billion people.

An “acceptance of the essential rightness” of this particular death is shared by a majority of human beings around the world — in this case.

I am left wondering, without a clue, why you or I should be affected at some emotional level about the execution of Saddam Hussein. My partner in life, a PhD anthropologist, is against execution even in this case. I respect that and will not argue the point. But it seems something in you takes you to a point where this execution bothers you on a visceral level. I cannot understand what that “something” is.

Maybe it has to do with the psychological phenomenon of compartmentalizing. By that I mean, I am able to separate the administration of a President I would not have elected, the conduct of a war I would not have authorized, the failings of a geopolitical policy I have issues with — from the death of Saddam Hussein. Had his death come another way, I would be no more or less saddened by it. I would have, in other words, said, “Fine; it’s about time”.

On this one, we part company intellectually and emotionally.

The glee among the talking heads as they announced the news of the execution was flat out disgusting. Especially since the news broke during the Saturday morning cartoons. ‘Cause this is the stuff kids should be watching with their corn flakes. Where’s Holy Joe with his outrage about the coarsening of our culture? Or maybe the powers that be really think this is appropriate as a lesson for the young? That vengeance is patriotic? That sadism is respectable?

We grieve when those close to us is one whose life is snuffed out (no matter how). We sympathize when a good person is lost to us. We are insecure when an important person whom we have come to depend on is suddenly gone. We worry when the circumstances are such that “it could have been me” or someone we cherish. We are devastated when it is someone whose life is intertwined with ours.

What is it about Saddam Hussein that should cause any of those reactions from someone outside of his family and inner circle upon his death?

All death is a negative experience for someone like me, who has no belief in an afterlife and who rejects the notion that “it’s God’s will” for lack of evidence. EXCEPT in a case like that of Saddam Hussein.

Many (most?) people in the world do not favor capital punishment, and I am among them. But there are circumstances where that conviction can be set aside for a moment — when the knowledge that a person so defiled the glorious concept of “being”, so desecrated what it means to participate in life as a peer human, that his removal from the earth is acceptable. More than acceptable for some, acceptable for others, and unacceptable for a very small number of us for reasons that are probably “personal”.

I’m not celebrating Saddam’s early departure from planet Earth. But I am very easily accepting it as an outcome deserved by the very worst among us, by (perhaps) one in a billion people.

An “acceptance of the essential rightness” of this particular death is shared by a majority of human beings around the world — in this case.

I am left wondering, without a clue, why you or I should be affected at some emotional level about the execution of Saddam Hussein. My partner in life, a PhD anthropologist, is against execution even in this case. I respect that and will not argue the point. But it seems something in you takes you to a point where this execution bothers you on a visceral level. I cannot understand what that “something” is.

Maybe it has to do with the psychological phenomenon of compartmentalizing. By that I mean, I am able to separate the administration of a President I would not have elected, the conduct of a war I would not have authorized, the failings of a geopolitical policy I have issues with — from the death of Saddam Hussein. Had his death come another way, I would be no more or less saddened by it. I would have, in other words, said, “Fine; it’s about time”.

On this one, we part company intellectually and emotionally.