Monday, March 11, 2013

"Very sad life. Probably will have very sad death. But at least there is symmetry."



"Save a life, save the world."

It is a saying that originates from the well-known fact that Adam is our great forefather that engaged in... whatever it is when you reproduce with your own rib. Killing a man at that point (or to be more precise, THE man) would've destined the whole species to nonexistence. Thus, save a life, save the world, save the future. Save the species.

It is also a saying that has meaning in modern times. Chaos theory is a famous phenomenon that merely states that changing even the smallest detail in our timeline compared to what is 'supposed to be' has disastrous consequences. This applies to the present as well. You don't know what a person is bound to do in the future. You don't know how the mere existence of a single particular person affects people around him or her. You don't know the effects of not saving a person on yourself. If you have a chance to save a person, you would probably regret not doing it. Alas, there is a chance that saving a life does more harm to the world than it's worth.

"I did what I did because all life is sacred. But if the object of my reactions does not share this view I fear I served the present by sacrificing the future."

In a way, it is the age-old question of capital punishment. Execution as a form of punishment is quite brutal, but is it really the wrong way to do things? Sure, life imprisonment does not sound dandy, but if you get comforts like TVs, Internet and whatnot that some prisons allow, then it does not sound that bad. Sure, you only get visitors at preset times and often not at all, but you can still live your life. And if there is an economic downturn you might be set free due to overpopulated prisons. Sure, it is not exactly rainbows and blue skies, but it is not exactly hell either. But it is very taxing for the society to keep you alive, to keep you fed, to keep you healthy. So life imprisonment is not 'sentencing someone to live', it is sentencing someone to remain a burden to the society.

There are concerns about how certain can you really be about someone's guilt. Stick an innocent man in jail, find out he is innocent, and you can release him. Kill him at first and there is no going back, resurrection is a long way off. There are concerns about how serious an offense has to be to merit the death penalty. There are no clear boundaries, which is why it is better off to keep the death penalty off the table as a whole.

There is not perfect, elegant solution to punishing people for crimes. Law and justice are determined by the collective sense of morals of the society. Culture is a huge influence. But one cannot ignore that every punishment has its downsides. It is never punishing just an individual, it is always punishing the society that raised the offender as well. It is of the utmost importance that life is preserved, but there ain't just the one way.

"Time not important. Only life important."

1 comment: