The controversy between whether Capital punishment is unconstitutional and biblical contradiction has been going on for close to 50 years. We must take into consideration that in order to translate the variances of the contradictions within the bible, we must understand biblical translation of today’s society is only what is wanted to be believed was meant by the “powers that be”, who wrote the bible. We must also realize the original text was written in Aramie and Samarian, and then later scribed in Hebrew. No one has spoken or written Aramie or Samarian since the time of Christ. Therefore, the content is actually translated to today’s society’s meaning.
Let us define the meaning of homicide. Homicide is defined as one Human being taking another human beings life. One must also take into thought war, civil disputes, mass lead suicide, (i.e. Johnstown, Waco Texas) would not these be considered homicides as well? The Sixth commandment of the Bible states that “thou shalt not kill” which goes against what homicide in all its forms, which includes capital punishment where on the death certificate clearly states… “Cause of Death: Homicide”. But then again, “an eye for an eye or tooth for a tooth”: would not these mean that homicide for a homicide or murder for a murder?
Biblical punishments go hand in hand against the sixth amendment “cruel and unusual punishment”, example being stoning, crucifying, some even enjoyed the occasional disembowelment and hanging is still in effect today. Most punishments were long and torturous. Individuals who religiously follow the bible would more than likely be against the biblical punishments say for: an eye for an eye or tooth for a tooth” in order to say “Pro-life”. Would this not be saying the church is in opposition to capital punishment? (Same for abortion) with the exception of when it would be seen fit in the churches eyes- contradicting is it not? So which would be accurate? You would have to choose which would be the correct version of meaning of the bible: Sixth Commandment or an “eye for an eye/tooth for a tooth”?
Let us define “Cruel and Unusual punishment” of the sixth amendment. Cruel being defined as excruciating, torturous, conflicting pain with malice. Unusual punishment being outside the norm of accepted society: such as disembowelment, mental abuse, (such as solitary confinement for extended times) mental torment, (being housed where execution is to take place) just to name a few.
Let us take a look at a few of the capital punishment types of executions that have been and few still are in use today:
Electrocution: painful, torturous, like being hit by lightning continuously until your internal organs would cook while you are still alive, strapped to a chair mentally, and physically able to feel everything, until your nerve endings finally are cooked and the final signs are the tears of blood that would be rolling from your protruding eyes that eventually explode from your head. How is that not cruel and unusual punishment?
In 1983, Jimmie Lee Gray, was executed by lethal gas, in the words of Doctor Richard, Traytsman, a professor at John Hopkins, “We would not asphyxiate by cyanide gas or by any other substance to kill animals used in experiment.” He continued on in detail how lethal gas induces heart attacks that are painful on its victims. Gray was executed regardless that the courts found everything stated in the appeal to be true and accurate. The viewing area had to be cleared because it was too horrifying for witnesses to see. Attorney David Bruck stated, “he died while convulsing and banging his head on a steel pole in the gas chamber while reporters counted his moans. He died an hour later. This opened a hole in the Constitution of the United States. We as humans find that it is easier to continue a rip than it is to try and mend it. Obviously an inmate can be subject to inhumane punishment, whereas a “normal” citizen would not. Is this to redefine, Cruel and unusual?
In the case of Tommie Smith, 1996, an intravenous drug user. More so that the executioner could not find his vein in order to carry out the lethal injection death sentence. Unofficial “executioners” plunged an angio catheter into his heart muscle, which is a procedure that takes well over 35 minutes to perform under perfect conditions, yet alone a rushed and botched execution. It took Tommie at least another hour to two hours to finally cease to exist. Is pain and terror, in effect, cruel and unusual punishment?
Capital punishment as a deterrent, is also not working as originally intended. If no one actually sees the process of execution for capital offenses, how is it to deter the common criminal from taking crime too far? In the bible various offenses that we accept today as a norm and not crimes would receive the death penalty in biblical times. In one case, in 1991, California Vs KQED-TV: California State succeeded in winning a ruling against letting television stations air or televising executions. Would not letting people see what happens when you break the law, help to deter criminals from continuously breaking the laws? Do the tax payers not want to see where millions of their tax dollars go?
In reality homicide in any of its forms, anything but cruel and unusual?