Posts
Iran is going old school on punishment, requiring a scorned lover who doused a woman with acid, blinding her, to himself be blinded by acid. Since one of my faithful readers asked me for my thoughts on it, here goes.
I support the death penalty. I personally believe it should at least be an option for all violent crimes such as robbery, rape and murder. (Yes, there are many cases of innocent people being put to death. Yes, the justice system needs to be improved. But that is a separate topic.) If a person is guilty with overwhelming evidence, the death penalty needs to at least be on the table.
However, the why is what is important here. I believe in the death penalty not as punishment or deterrence, but as prevention. Dead people can't hurt anyone. Punishments such as, in this case, dripping acid in the eyes, do not prevent crimes, but simply seeks to even scores which can never be evened. To me, this is unproductive and simply creates misery without fixing anything. It is unlikely that an act as irrational as throwing acid on a person can be deterred.
At the same time, there is an argument for corporal punishment for some crimes. I know my liberal friends will argue this point, and I agree, it is mostly speculative at this point. The crime/punishment in many countries is a chicken/egg deal. However, I have to believe, for a certain category of crimes it may work very well. These crimes would need to be not governed by emotion, as there is no deterrence that will work there. Crimes such as car theft, burglary and certain extreme DWI's would fall into this category. I simply have to believe that public flogging for these offenses would reduce their number. It is likely to be an non-issue due to many reasons, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't work.
As far as my direct reaction to this incident, it's simple: kill him. People like that can't be allowed to live. The chance he may reoffend is too high to risk.
The Islamic world also must realize that things such as the original incident here scar it's name far more than terrorism. There is no excuse for any group of people to treat other groups of people as property to be owned or destroyed based on their own emotion.
I also find it ironic that so many intensely traditional groups decry modern society/the media/Hollywood for "objectifying" women by showing any sexuality. It seems pretty obvious that the worst danger to women is the reactionary three part classification of women as relative/wife/whore. This is where the view of women as property comes from, and it is the view of women as property that creates the worst offenses towards them.
Above all, it is a tragedy that we are even having this discussion.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Thanks for your comments. The shock factor of the story and the fact that it is so completely outside our cultural norm forced questions in my mind about our own legal system - does "justice" mean punishment, prevention (as you seem to believe and which I can't accept), compensation for the victim, or rehabilitation for the perpetrator?
And while this punishment offends me as barbaric, cruel, and unusual... does it have the potential to achieve some of those ends better than our system? If so, what does that say about those ends - are they not the point of justice?
While I'm still mostly in the question-asking phase of my reaction to this article, I think I have to disagree with you on the message this sends about Islamic countries views on women. While I am NOT making a general statement about treatment of women in Islamic countries, I actually believe that THIS particular case speaks, if anything, highly of the society's protection of women. Violence against women in America is shockingly prevalent and, from what I see and read, abusers are rarely told as definitively that their abuse is unacceptable.
Thanks again for your comments! My mind was reeling after I read this story and I wanted to hear someone else's thoughts to help me organize my own.
Thank you for your feedback.
While I think justice should strive to achieve all of these things, the only one which can be assured is the prevention of re-offense. The others are largely the internal functions of the mind, and vary wildly from person to person.
I think the method is of limited use, and does not weigh well against the stooping of society to the level of the criminal. Some corporal punishment may be appropriate, but it must be used wisely.
I must disagree with you about the belief that this shows a respect for women in Islamic culture. In most of those cultures, what we call domestic violence is literally not even a crime. You could do it in the middle of the town square and it would not be punished. Indeed, I am fairly certain that if a man had done this to his wife or daughter, he would not be charged, as she is his property. In the article it was mentioned that the process to even punish the man responsible was long and hard, and owed much to international press coverage. The courts discouraged her, and it was only with perseverance, the help of a male attorney and much indirect international pressure he was punished.
I hope to write more on related subjects in the future, and I always appreciate comments and requests. Thanks again for reading!
Thanks for the response. Just to clarify - I never meant to defend Islamic countries record on women's rights. My points were a) THIS was viewed as a crime and was punished as a crime - I don't think that reflects poorly on Islamic society in general. b)This sort of thing happens on a tragically frequent basis here in the U.S. and our laws frequently allow the perpetrators to abuse again and again and again. Held to the standard you're holding to Iran to on THIS case, the U.S. would look pretty bad also.
Post a Comment