-
And another view of justice
(4)Here is a poem from Whitman.
I’m not quite sure I can reach this degree of inclusiveness. There are people operating today who are doing things so twisted I don’t even want to hear about them — especially in a juror’s chair — much less identify with them.
Yet they are human. And my Christian raisings would have me believe it is these people I should try to love more than the righteous man or the judge.
I don’t think that would make me a bad juror — except in cases where the death penalty is the sentence. Nothing says a juror can’t be compassionate. But it does mean I wouldn’t use the law for revenge.
You Felons on Trial in Courts
YOU felons on trial in courts;
You convicts in prison-cells—you sentenced assassins, chain’d and hand-cuff’d with iron;
Who am I, too, that I am not on trial, or in prison?
Me, ruthless and devilish as any, that my wrists are not chain’d with iron, or my ankles with iron?You prostitutes flaunting over the trottoirs, or obscene in your rooms,
Who am I, that I should call you more obscene than myself?O culpable!
I acknowledge—I exposé!
(O admirers! praise not me! compliment not me! you make me wince,
I see what you do not—I know what you do not.)Inside these breast-bones I lie smutch’d and choked;
Beneath this face that appears so impassive, hell’s tides continually run;
Lusts and wickedness are acceptable to me;
I walk with delinquents with passionate love;
I feel I am of them—I belong to those convicts and prostitutes myself,
And henceforth I will not deny them—for how can I deny myself?—Walt Whitman. Leaves of Grass. Philadelphia: David McKay, [c1900]; Bartleby.com, 1999.
While I’m in the pulpit, I’d like to draw your attention to this column from the Lexington Herald-Leader’s religion writer, Paul Prather. Prather addresses the issue of mixing Christianity with politics. You should read all of his column but here’s what I guess I’d call the money quote:
Christians, whatever our political leanings, ought to be awfully careful when we venture into the public square waving our Bibles and presuming to speak for God.
Our ideas about biblical and divine truth seem to shift with the whims of popular opinion and party platforms — not to mention talk radio.
If we’re not careful, we might claim we’re speaking for God when really we’re only reflecting the ideas of our own circle of preachers and churchgoers and pundits. We can rationalize almost anything. We’re easily led down almost any path.
. . .
I’m not lobbying here for or against legalized abortion or for or against capital punishment. I’m not even speaking here in favor of church-state separation.
I’m arguing in favor of humility by Christians in the political arena.
That seems to be the virtue most lacking in our public discussions these days.
Possibly related posts:
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
Paul Prather, poetry, Poets, Walt Whitman
4 Responses to “And another view of justice”
-
Humility is definitely lacking as is the ability to actually have a discussion versus a shouting match.
Very thoughtful post
-
It is not only Christians who need to practice humility. Vilifying those who disagree with one’s views, seems to me to be a characteristic of many (most?) ideological groups these days.
-
Well, rudeness is maybe sometimes needed to get things done. Bullying and vilifying do seem to be the order of the day and it continues because it works. I don’t have any idea how to stop that. It seems to me that, whatever you may think of Obama’s policies, he’s trying to stop the bullying tone in Washington and he really doesn’t seem to be getting very far with it.
What Prather seems to be talking about is, I think, blasphemy, the idea that what you believe to be so at this moment is the revealed word of God. There is, for example, a conservative group that is now re-translating the Bible to take out its “liberal bias.” In my opinion, trying not to be rude here, that does not seem like trying to practice the discipline of Christianity but rather reshaping Christianity to suit the ideology of the moment.
Granted, that’s not a new practice. But it still fits the definition of blasphemy: the crime of assuming to oneself the rights or qualities of God.
The Prather essay is relevant to my discussion of jury service because I think that we have come to be a society that uses the law for revenge but revenge is self-perpetuating. Prather points out that many Christians who are adamantly against a woman’s right to an abortion are just as adamantly for the death penalty. This position is inconsistent.
Much hot emotion has been expended locally since the murder of Wesley Mullins in 2007. Now a man is on trial, accused of that murder and likely to forfeit his life. If the man is guilty, he owes society a debt. I don’t think society has the right to take his life. I was much heartened by this quote in yesterday’s Herald-Leader in an article about the beginning of jury selection in Woodford County:
[Judge] Johnson asked jurors if they could consider imposing all five possible penalties: 20 to 50 years in prison, a life sentence, prison without probation or parole for 25 years, life without the possibility of probation or parole, and the death penalty.
The majority said they could consider the full range of penalties. However, one man said that he believed in Jesus Christ and that life without the possibility of probation or parole was as far as he could go.
That anonymous juror seems to me to have it right.
-
Oh, I totally agree with the Prather essay. I was only enlarging as it seems most ideological groups are intolerant of divergent views – intolerant to the point of fanaticism.
Leave a Reply
Artistic Support
Sherry has also received an Artist Enrichment grant from the Kentucky Foundation for Women.
Recent Comments