I dislike the death penalty. It's far more expensive than keeping someone locked up for life, research shows that it doesn't deter anyone, and far too often a poor innocent is executed. However, there is one case where I can understand the use of the death penalty - for when people have gone to war against innocent, law-abiding Americans and our government, trying to overthrow the American way of life through senseless slaughter. In a word, terrorists. Once someone shows themselves to be at war with America, I can understand America fighting back to the fullest extent possible.
Today, a terrorist got off with a life sentence instead of the death penalty. [More on the flip]
A man who killed at least two and injured at least 120 in a spree of bombings in attempt to terrorize our nation will serve four consecutive life sentences without parole. A man who wanted to cancel the 1996 Olympics through terror because he disagreed with the freedoms in this country. His bombing at Atlanta's Centennial Olympic is the fourth biggest terrorist attack to occur on American soil. Yet, the government accepted a plea bargain deal that saved his life instead of fighting back to the fullest extent possible.
Again, I am not a big fan of the death penalty, so I am mildly disappointed about the plea bargain. However, I would expect all those Republicans who are upset that the Supreme Court won't let them execute minors and the mentally retarded would be jumping up and down with anger that they can't execute a real, honest-to-God terrorist. Total silence from them in all the reports that I have seen. Why? Because Eric Rudolph is a "good terrorist". He's a natural progression of the extreme right's war on homosexuals and abortion. While church leaders talk about trying to stop the "genocide" of abortion and the family-destroying homosexual agenda, Rudolph acted.
I find that silence to be scary. I find the silence from the Catholic church particularly frightening. Rudolph wrote, "I was born a Catholic, and with forgiveness I hope to die one." Shouldn't that Catholic Church be distancing itself from a terrorist? Shouldn't those Catholic bishops who publicly announced that priests should refuse to give holy communion to John Kerry say that same thing about Rudolph? Deborah Rudolph, Rudolph's former sister-in-law, said, "Knowing that he's living under government control for the rest of his life, I think that's worse to him than death." My guess is that being denounced by the Catholic Church would be far more painful. Yet, the only denouncement of Eric Randolph I can find by a Catholic bishop occurred in 1998.
What I fear is the potential Eric Rudolph's out there who might one day act on Tom DeLay's suggestion that "The time will come for the [judges] responsible for this to answer for their behavior." Rudolph's confession of his crimes is a great opportunity for this country's religious and political leaders to denounce all violence and terror, regardless of the justification given. By being silent now, I fear those religious and political leaders are encouraging more domestic terrorists.
