Tuesday, December 13, 2005


With baited breath, I visited various blogs that are my daily reads to see what I expected to be a huge reaction to the execution of ex-gang member Stanley "Tookie" Williams. He was executed by the State of California last night just after 12:30 after he was refused clemency by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Tookie has become a bit of a "cause celebre" these days, getting high-profile support from Snoop Dogg, Jamie Foxx and the Rev. Jessie Jackson--all who were begging the Gov to stay Tookie's execution.

So why would I expect Canadian Conservative bloggers to rally to his cause? Admittedly, it seems odd considering that Williams was convicted of killing four people, including a convenience store clerk during a robbery as well as a South Korean family of three.

Terri Schiavo, of course.

You remember Terri. She was the poor woman who's husband was appealing for the right to end her life back in March. At that time, debate raged on blogs every about how and when the state -- in this case the U.S. Congress -- should intervene to ensure that Terri was allowed to live.

I remember at the time somewhat taken aback by the intensity of the postings. Conservative bloggers passionately spoke out against the Terri's husband, the judiciary, politicians and the media who were not prepared to step in to "save a life". They advocated for Congressional members, Florida Governor Jeb Bush and even President Bush to personally step in and stop Terri's feeding tube from being removed.

So I was intrigued by the lack of really any comment on the Williams execution by those same people.

I guess it all depends on who's life the state takes, eh?

Now don't get me wrong. I'm not saying I support Williams or a bid for clemency. I don't know if the guy was innocent or not (as he claims). However, I also wasn't one of those speaking out against Schaivo's husband having the right to end her life.

I think the silence is, frankly, hypocritical.

You can't be against the state allowing someone the right to die while at the same time advocating for the execution of a convict. Period.

BOTH cases fall within the law of that state.

BOTH cases involve the state either implictly or explicity being a party to ending a life.

BOTH involve an individual who claimed to be "innocent" (either by not being guilty or that was aun unwilling victim of someone else's wishes).

BOTH cases had people on both sides who claimed to "know" all the facts about the case (Schaivo's mental state, Williams' innocence).

BOTH were situations where the State (Florida/Federal government, California) could have stepped in and prevented the person from being killed but did not.

BOTH stories end with a human life ending.

So where are the posts? Where is the outrage and condemnation at Williams' execution? The state could very well have executed an innocent man! This is state-sanctioned murder!


Comments: Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]