Bloodthirsty Indiana

OK, I’m one of those rare liberals that actually supports the death penalty. Though my opinion is let’s either do it right or not at all. For me right = no endless appeals for years on end.

Indiana is apparently very bloodthirsty. This is a prime example of where a temporary reprieve should have been granted and where the death penalty was not carried out correctly. In this example you have a convicted murderer that is actually trying to do something good as one of his last acts. Instead, Indiana has decided that he has waived his ability to do good and that his sister should suffer because the states blood thirst.

What’s the problem? If he’s going to be executed anyhow, what would the problem have been for him to donate his liver to his sister? At least somebody would have had something good come out of the tragedy that is this mans life. The only thing I can think is that Indiana wanted his innocent sister to suffer, so his family would have suffer just like the murder victims family.

To the state of Indiana I say – two wrongs don’t make a right.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: