Having suffered a heart attack back in September, Allen had asked prison authorities to let him die if he went into cardiac arrest before his execution, a request prison officials said they would not honor.

“At no point are we not going to value the sanctity of life,” said prison spokesman Vernell Crittendon. “We would resuscitate him,” then execute him.

Point of contention: at what point does the sanctity of life even enter into this equation?

Interpolation: victims/authorities don’t want Allen to die; they want to kill him.

Question: define justice.

§948 · January 18, 2006 · Tags: , ·

7 Comments to “What’s wrong here?”

  1. rob says:

    Does this mean Schrodinger’s cat is alive?

  2. Ben says:

    Yeah, turns out there was a hole in the box, and we can see inside after all.

  3. Ben says:

    But punishment doesn’t answer a fundamental question: who, then, does justice benefit?

  4. Andy says:

    Ask the family of whomever he must have killed.

  5. Ben says:

    I’m sure the fact that he got killed instead of dying of his own accord made the family feel better, briefly, but that’s hardly solved any problems. Allen’s no more dead, his victims no more alive, and the family no less bereft. What a horrible existence it must be for them, to hinge satisfaction upon death; no, upon being agents of death.

  6. Ben says:

    I should add that my real reason for posting this excerpt was to point out the absurdity of saying that not letting someone die so that he can be executed is somehow related to the “sanctity” of life.

Leave a Reply