[gridlock]

Regarding the use of public funds argument, of course the choice is not between the best possible use of tax money (transplants for the poor) and the worst possible use of tax money (cable TV for Manson), but between the worst possible use of the money and the next-to-worst possible use (another floor on the Clinton Library).

But other than that, I take your point. I think that a compelling argument can be made for the execution of this particular human, based on his own actions and with full protections afforded. But I object to this process being equated with the putting down of an animal. There is no reason to give the state rights to treat people as animals when the same arguments can be made while treating people as people.

[myrabach]

Re: equating people to animals...

I do agree with you in treating people "like animals". First, I think it is important to understand that John Mohammed did not behave like an animal... he behaved like an evil human being. As much as we more sophisticated and morally superior humans want to deny that one of our species could behave in such a manner, the sad fact is... sin resides in all of us. Its too easy to brush off the evil doers among us as "animals". I think its very important for all of us to realize that human beings can and do behave in the most debase manner.

Secondly, this cannot be equated with putting down an animal. This should be seen as a moral society reacting to an evil member in the sanest way possible, and that is by eliminating that member from the very society he corrupts. We have to say as a moral people, that we will not tolerate this reprehensible behaviour by another human.

Leave the animals out of it... they don't care anyway.