Well, as a starting point, it fairly obviously harms the person killed. It doesn't just kill their physical body, it - potentially, at least - also scars their psyche, and, if they are guilty of a violent crime, potentially increases and compounds the damage for their next life. The victims then become both the person executed, and also those they impact in their next life.
Souls are immortal - they're not wiped out by something as trivial as the death of the physical body, but they can be moved and affected by great emotion. In this case, the emotions around a coldly, foreknown taking of life are - most times - enormous (particularly when prolonged for years), and of enough import to affect the soul.
There may be some offset here, if the person has changed their character (as appears to be the case for the Australians who were part of the Bali Nine, for instance - and I stressed the appears as I have not met these two men, and am relying on media reports only) - and the seemingly many prisoners who "find religion" on death row is not solely about trying to impress those who are hearing their cases, it is also about the circumstances they find themselves in leading to some genuine, deep thinking about what is important.
That does not happen to all who find themselves waiting for execution - and it does not apply to those who are innocent.
Those who are innocent may well find themselves so disturbed by the events as to become problem people in their next life - aggressive, perhaps, or at the least what other people consider over-sensitive or over-reactive. The TRUTH is that they have been taught to behave that way by the society that treated them so unjustly last time. (More on these people later.)
This also applies to those who have been tortured, or subjected to significant humiliation.
There are, however, other people who also harmed by the events of a capital punishment.
Apart from the significant others (including families of choice, legal obligation and blood) of the victims and the, say, murderer being executed, those other people being affected include everyone who is harmed (the influence is not necessarily only academic or neutral or necessarily beneficial) by the debate, including all those who argue for capital punishment, who are committing themselves to vengeance. The problem with this is that it blinds one to objectivity, and thus a better understanding of what really happened. I'll touch on this point again shortly.
There is another point here: the victims of the original crime. While so many people are focusing on the alleged or actual perpetrator, few people and fewer resources go to the direct victims of the original crime. Keeping people on death row is expensive - I don't know, but I suspect the expenses of compulsory appeals etc - all very necessary in the interests of preventing a miscarriage of justice - possibly make the whole thing more expensive than keeping someone in prison for the rest of their life. What if that money could be spent on supporting the direct victims - families and friends (the family of choice) of those murdered, for instance? This might be counselling, or it might be paying all bills and other expenses of any financial dependents of the murdered person (actual dependents, not those who the idiots who assume a nuclear family is "the norm" decree should be a dependent) or something else. Could that be less expensive than the current systems used in nations such as the USA?
The victims of the debate on capital punishment also includes those who argue badly against it - and I'm not considering that in the "Toastmasters" type of technical view of who can string words together in a way that satisfies artificial rules and expectations, but in terms of effectiveness in the real world and in terms of conduct (methods!). To illustrate that, consider this: recently there were some demonstrations against Islam in Australia (see here - and, while I am at it, here): that is concerning, although the arguments/concerns about change of lifestyle should be understood and acknowledged by all who think the demonstrators were wrong - which group includes me. The problems with those fears and concerns of the so-called 'Reclaim Australia' mob include (but are not limited to -there are no doubt others that I cannot think of!):
(a) new groups often wind up blending in to the existing culture by choice (consider, for instance, some of the European migrants to Australia, where the 3rd and 4th generations may not even speak what was their family's original language), so their concerns are not necessarily matched by history;However, what I saw of those opposing the 'Reclaim Australia' protestors was also concerning. Shouting matches and pushing contests are not going to help the situation. What is needed is coherent, calm presentation of facts, not incoherent and emotional screaming. The aim must always be to change the hearts and minds of those who are opposed, not to give vent to understandable feelings of frustration. These sort of emotive demonstrators are potentially harming their cause, and possibly exacerbating their frustration and sense of helplessness, rather than contributing to learning and growing. Those opposing the 'Reclaim Australia' protestors also need to learn to be effective communicators (in the sense of acheiving measurable results through BPLF means, rather than how well they comply with the so-called rules of debate), and to understand what legal words can mean - as an example, someone who basically commits a murder using a car is charged with culpable driving: that phrase means murder, but unless one has been taught that, it isn't obvious (and this is a mistake I have made in the past). Who is at fault here? Actually, our education system, for not covering issues such as key aspects of the legal system (and how to manage change, argue fluently - and listen and perceive to others' arguments, etc).
(b) the exceptions are where large numbers of new people come in - such as happened with the white invasion of Australia. In that instance, the new group may drown out the original, but in the circumstances we are considering here, something about Australia drew those people here, and to assume that significant numbers of them want to change what drew them here is illogical;
(c) many of the risks these people are concerned with have arisen out of concerns about terrorism and radicalisation. By focusing on a perceived (external) cause of that, they miss the real facts - facts such as converts coming from alienated people within this society (and in the 1980s I met Caucasian Australians, born and bred here, who have converted to Islam), which raises the issues of mainstream people often being too inflexible and downright stupid to comprehend that not everyone wants to live the way they do, and of inconvenient facts such as the history and legacy of Western interference in many of these areas. This type of deflection away from true causes onto perceptions is the behaviour of tyrants;
(d) some concerns are valid - for instance, the way some Muslim cultures treat their women. The issues here, however, may well be in the cultural interpretations of Islam that evolved in the different cultures that Islam reached - and I am aware of people within Islam arguing exactly that. Furthermore, those who I know who are rabidly anti-Islam (and I am thinking particularly of a work colleague here, a misogynistic, chauvinistic many who has been the subject of many complaints, and who almost no-one can tolerate sitting near), and raise exactly this point, are themselves often guilty of exactly the same problem behaviour (that work colleague has been the subject of several discussions by a range of people with our HR department over his offensiveness);
(e) change is inevitable. We are not the same society we were when Australia was predominantly rural, and yet many Australians cling to a romanticised notion of what that Australia was like (or they cling to a romanticised notion of previous eras, such as the 1950s - that period of homophobia and hidden resultant suicides, hidden domestic violence, blatant racism, etc). How much better to address the topic of change, and how we want to address that, directly. As another example, technology has changed us - cheap air flights, television, mobile phones, PCs and the Internet, all of these have fundamentally changed this society and the people in it, in some ways for the better, in others for the worse. Change is inevitable: what matters most is how you manage it.
Those comments also apply to those opposing the death penalty.
Now, another aspect that has to be thought of here is that of justice.
From a spiritual perspective, the person who is executed wrongfully may actually be experiencing their karmic return. That may be true, and the soul may "get the point", but that learning will possibly be lessened or offset by the damage done - through the prolonged emotional states while waiting for execution - to the soul. This is one of the flaws, in my view, of karma - yes, in my view, karma has flaws, probably the main one being that karmic justice is rarely seen to be done, which raises issues, and saying that this is about learning to trust the Universe is, in my view, an unsatisfactory response. *
I'm starting to get tired, so I'll start to wind this up.
The problem of justice, in the mundane world, also applies to the context of capital punishment. If someone is guilty, they should receive BPLF justice: that means, in this world, deprivation of liberty, without cruel or unusual punishment. Now, as soon I raise that, in my experience, someone will almost inevitably say that prisoners have it easy, and lead pampered lives. Those who say that are moronic idiots (I trust, Dear Reader, you are noting and discounting these instances where my words become emotive, rather than validly arguing my case? This is one of several such instances :) ) who have no conception of what being in prison is like - nor of the fundamental issue that it is deprivation of liberty that is the sole form of punishment, not abuse from guards, hard labour, or cruel and inhumane conditions.
There are, however, probably valid concerns about length of sentences, and time off sentences for good behaviour, etc, but these issues should be directly identified and discussed, rather than being ignored or hidden under the smokescreen of capital punishment.
Also, on crimes that do not involve life imprisonment, recidivism (i.e., re-offending) and changes for the worse (I have spoken to young people who came out youth detention knowing multiple ways to abuse someone else's credit card, for instance) need to be addressed effectively, rather than the causes being obscured by the smokescreen of unfounded worldviews being blindly imposed on the situation. The effectiveness of rehabilitation need to be discussed (based on evidence, wherever possible, and with proper acknowledgement of frustration for those who perceive problems or find solutions emotionally unsatisfactory, and due consideration of ways of addressing that), as well as the issues of loss of trust in the legal system - the murder of Jill Meagher has highlighted the problems with the parole system, for instance, and the general disatisfaction with sentencing indicates a problem that needs to be resolved (although that resolution may be by education of the public: I recall reading an article once where members of the public were shown key facts of cases and asked what sentences they would impose. In general, would have imposed more lenient sentences than those the judges actually did - the exception was rape, where the sentences which would have imposed were more severe).
On rehabilitation, I mentioned learning by the soul. The ideal is to learn in constructive situations, but there are some who stubbornly refuse to learn, and for those those people, the negative learning of karma may be necessary, less effective thought it may be (I have to admit there are some lessons I have had to learn, both in this life and over the millennia, "the hard way").
These problems all become more pronounced when capital punishment is being discussed, and many people make the mistake of assuming that, once an issue such as capital punishment, has been BPLF addressed, no further work needs to be done on it. Wrong. The next generations will also have largely the same mix of attitudes of this one, and it will be many centuries before anyone can say the issue does not need further addressing.
OK, time to get ready for the day.
* To some extent, this is the sort of issue that the Lords - of all gender possibilities - of Karma can choose to get involved with. If ever you've heard of things like people having karma "set aside", that is due to the Lords and Ladies of Karma taking action to "overrule" the normal actions of karma (which is a bit like suspending gravity). It is incredibly rare, and if you're thinking of seeking such, I can virtually guarantee you won't get it. My view is that if you're due such help, you'll get it.
[2] Please
see here, here and my post "The
Death of Wikipedia" for the reasons
I now recommend caution when using Wikipedia. I'm also exploring use of h2g2,
although that doesn't appear to be as extensive (h2g2 is intended - rather
engagingly - to be the Earth edition of
"The Hitchhiker's
Guide to the Galaxy").
[3] I apologise for the formatting: it seems Blogger is
no longer as WYSIWYG as it used to be, and there are a lot of unwanted
changes to layout made upon publishing.
Love, light, hugs and blessings
(pronounced "new-MYTH-ear"; ... aka Bellatrix
Lux … aka Morinehtar … would-be drýicgan or maga
... )
My "blogiography" (list of all posts and guide as to how to best use this
site) is here, and my glossary/index is here.
I started this blog to cover karmic regression-rescue
(see here and here), and it grew ... See here for my group mind project, here and here for my "Pagans for Peace" project (and join me
for a few minutes at some time between 8 and 11 PM on Sunday, wherever you are,
to meditate-clear for peace), and here
for my bindrune kit-bag. I also strongly recommend
learning how to flame, ground
and shield, do alternate
nostril breathing, work
with colour, and see also here and be
flexible.
- Neither eloquence nor inarticulateness inherently indicates correctness, but, as words can kill, the right to freedom of speech comes with a DUTY to be as well-informed, objective and balanced as you can be.
- Gnwmythr's Stropping Strap: Occam's Razor only works if the simplest solution is actually recognised as being the simplest, rather than the one that best fits one's bigotries being labelled 'simplest'.
- I mourn the desecration of the term 'Light Worker' by commercial interests, and the warping of the word 'Light' away from 'Clear Light' by the "(Fluffy) White Lighters".
- Presuming that everyone has, or wants, a smartphone is discriminatory, unspiritual, and downright stupid.
- Obsessive love may be a cover up of guilt.
- Proxy embarrassment is both a form of control, and an internal barrier to truth, honesty and perspicacity.
- Our entire life experience, with all the many wondrous and varied people, places and events in it, is too small a sample for statistical reliability about Life.
- May the world of commerce and business be recognised to be a servant, not a master, of the lives of people.
- Life is not a struggle for status.
- Being accustomed to interacting via certain rules makes those rules neither right nor universal.
- Like fire to the physical, emotions to the soul make a good servant, and a bad master.
- The means shape the end.
- My favourite action movie of all time is "Gandhi", although I've recently come across "Invictus" and might put that one in to that category. However, I loathe the stereotypical action movie - and, for similar reasons, I loathe many dramas, which are often emotionally violent, more so in some cases than many war films.
- All of the above - and this blog - could be wrong, or subject to context, perspective, or state of spiritual evolution ... and blogging has been described as graffiti with punctuation :)
Human dignity is
the inherently cumulative holistic
combination of human rights, wellbeing and potential, and all actions or
interaction which promote, realise or facilitate same. The converse also
applies: whatever degrades, diminishes or robs humans of dignity, is inherently
undignified.
Gnwmythr
The “purpose” of spiritual evolution is not
the attainment of “spiritual perfection” - not in the sense of not having to
evolve further, at any rate, since there is no such thing. We need to evolve in
order to grow - but we can take rest breaks (hopefully well earned :) ) along the way. No, the “purpose” of evolution is,
rather, to perfect our ability to learn, and thus grow.
Gnwmythr
Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice
everywhere.
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Females, get over 'cute'. Get competent.
Get trained. Get capable. Get over 'cute'. And those of you who are called
Patty and Debby and Suzy, get over that. Because we use those names to
infantalise females – we keep females in their 'little girl' state by the names
we use for them. Get over it. If you want to be taken seriously, get serious.
Jane Elliott
The only thing necessary for the triumph of
evil is for good [people] to do nothing.
(based on
writing by) Edmund Burke
We didn't inherit the Earth from our
ancestors, we only borrowed it from our children
Antoine De Saint-Exupéry
There are risks and costs to a program of
action. But they are far less than the long-range risks and costs of
comfortable inaction.
John F. Kennedy
Tags: attitudes, communication, crime, emotions, growth, justice, karma, public debate, society,
First published: Wodansdagr, 15th April, 2015
Last edited (excluding fixing typo's
and other minor matters): Monday, 27th April, 2015 (added note re Lords and Ladies of Karma)
