There are almost no issues where I don't understand both sides.

Taxation, the size of government, abortion, socialism, capitalism,

as strongly as I feel about any issue, I understand the opposition.

But there is an exception, the death penalty for murder.

Here the gulf is unbridgeable between those of us who believe

that some murderers and I emphasize some murderers should be put to death,

and those who believe that no murderer should ever be put to death.

Take this example on the afternoon of July 23rd 2007 in the town of Cheshire, Connecticut.

Two men broken to the home of Dr. William Pettit, his wife Jennifer, and his two daughters.

The men beat Dr. Pettit nearly to death with a baseball bat,

one of the men raped the doctor's wife, and the other man sexually assaulted

their 11-year-old daughter, Michaela. The two men then strangled Mrs. Pettit to death,

tied down the two daughters on beds, doused them with gasoline,

and while the girls were still alive, set the house on fire.

Dr. Pettit survived, but his wife and daughters did not.

Those opposed to capital punishment believe that these two men have a right to keep their lives.

So, is there anything a person can do to deserve the death penalty?

To those opposed to capital punishment, the answer is no.

In fact, many opponents of capital punishment believe that killing murderers is the same as murder.

You heard me right. Most opponents equate the murder of an innocent family with putting the

murderers of that family to death. Opponents of capital punishment also argue that keeping old

murderers alive sanctifies the value of human life. But the opposite is true, keeping every

...