Can Unconditional Love Actually be Betrayal?
Tim Robbin’s film, Dead Man Walking, attempts to appeal to emotion as it presents differing views on the death penalty. The cinematography of this movie, inspired by the non-fiction book by Sister Helen Prejean, is very graphic, yet emotionally moving and thought provoking. It tells the story of a nun, Sister Helen Prejean herself, who takes on the responsibility of assisting a death row inmate, Matthew Poncelet, in his attempt to earn a life sentence in jail rather than receiving the death penalty by lethal injection for two counts of murder and rape. A major premise displayed in this story questions whether Sister Prejean manifested more love toward Poncelet or more betrayal toward the families of the victims that he hurt. The movie combines themes of religious and moral values with others such as social justice, family upbringing, and dignity. Because of the multitude of combined factors that exist, each character’s point of view looks different, and these varying opinions are expressed during the course of the film.
One of the most obvious themes of Dead Man Walking is social justice and the processes of the legal criminal justice system—specifically, the death penalty. It is evident that our country tries to provide justice for crimes committed that have violated another person’s unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. But what does the word justice mean? Debates regarding the death penalty have existed for many years, and it is a controversial topic. Sister Helen Prejean is against the death penalty. Although she is uncertain about what she is doing, has no experience with death row inmates, and faces much opposition from people around her, she wants t...
... middle of paper ...
...,” once again quoting the Bible. He seems to take this literally at first, but eventually begins to see it in a different light. When Poncelet finally confesses to raping Hope Percy and killing Walter Delacroix, he is now able die with “dignity,” as Sister Prejean would say.
If Sister Helen Prejean really is aiming to do God’s will, then counseling Poncelet should not be a betrayal to her faith or to the Delacroix and Percy families. However, because of the disparity that stands concerning this issue, in the Delacroix and Percy’s eyes, Sister Prejean is being unfaithful to them. Nevertheless, Sister Prejean can’t help but worry that if she does not counsel Poncelet in hopes that he will be “saved” from eternal condemnation, than she believes she will be betraying God, and therefore will not be carrying out her duty as a nun, and furthermore as a Catholic Christian.
Dead Man Walking is a nonfiction book written by Sister Helen Prejean which details her world of being a spiritual advisor for inmates facing the death penalty. Sister Prejean first became the spiritual advisor for Elmo Patrick Sonnier who was being executed for his role in the murder of two teenagers. After she went through the execution process with Sonnier she became the spiritual advisor for another man and became a well-known abolitionist. This piece chronicles Sister Prejean’s passage through the execution system and her experiences along the way.
...ke the other Puritans, Hope is able to follow her conscience and trust in her heart. When Nelema is imprisoned for her unorthodox method of healing of Cradock on Hope's behalf, Hope extricates Nelema from the authorities. After Magawisca is taken captive due to a promised rendezvous between Faith and Hope, Hope finds a way to rescue Magawisca from prison. Although Hope loves her sister and wishes to keep her home, she respects the sanctity of Faith's Christian bond with Oneco, albeit Catholic, and is happy for Faith when Oneco rescues her. Hope transcends the Puritan religion and embraces a universal religion, respecting others' differing relationships with God as holy. Hope, unlike her society, rejects strict adherence to religious tenets and follows her own heart.
The death penalty, a subject that is often the cause of major controversy, has become an integral part of the southern justice system in recent years. The supporters and opponents of this issue have heatedly debated each other about whether or not the death penalty should be allowed. They back their arguments with moral, logical, and ethical appeals, as seen in the essays by Ed Koch and David Bruck. Although both authors are on opposite sides of the issue, they use the same ideas to back up their argument, while ignoring others that they don’t have evidence for. Koch and Bruck’s use of moral, logical, and ethical persuasion enhance both of their arguments and place a certain importance on the issue of the death penalty, making the readers come to the realization that it is more than just life and death, or right and wrong; there are so many implications that make the issue much more 3-dimensional. In dealing with politics and controversial issues such as capital punishment.
In “The Death Penalty” (1985), David Bruck argues that the death penalty is injustice and that it is fury rather than justice that compels others to “demand that murderers be punished” by death. Bruck relies on varies cases of death row inmates to persuade the readers against capital punishment. His purpose is to persuade readers against the death penalty in order for them to realize that it is inhuman, irrational, and that “neither justice nor self-preservation demands that we kill men whom we have already imprisoned.” Bruck does not employ an array of devices but he does employ some such as juxtaposition, rhetorical questions, and appeals to strengthen his argument. He establishes an informal relationship with his audience of supporters of capital punishment such as Mayor Koch.
In the book “Dead Man Walking”, written by Sister Helen Prejean, is about the un-justifying laws of the death penalty. It features Patrick Sonnier, a criminal, who is sentenced to death because of the crime he has committed. The death penalty had been around for years and is arguable on the subject if it should be abolished or not. I stand with Prejean on her beliefs about how the death penalty is evil and unjust. For the purpose of this essay, I have chosen a poster which represents my thoughts and beliefs on what I feel strongly about the death penalty.
To the Vicario family, Angela’s virginity is more than a delicate flower that should only blossom to the right seed; it is a symbol of the family’s honor. As the youngest child and the last to be married, Angela must be protected at all costs so that the family’s honor is not shamed. Marriage is God’s approval for sex in the Roman Catholic religion; the only way for the family’s honor to not be shamed is if Angela marries a respectable man and has sex with this man. However, Angela loses her virginity prior to sex. Her virginity was taken unlawfully so the family’s honor was stolen in the process. The only way to redeem the family honor was to seek vengeance on the man that stole Angela’s virginity, Santiago Nasar.
Despite overwhelming national approval of it, deliberation over the death penalty in America has been dominated by the devious voices of the petite but vocal death penalty opposition, and aided heavily by the leftist groups like the NAACP, ACLU, and Amnesty International. Their deceitful repertoire of lies and half-truths has been echoed for so long, that many of these fallacies have eventually been regarded as fact in the mainstream, and even among death penalty advocates. The institution has been falsely accused of inaccuracy, ineffectiveness, and racism. And as the only course of action capable of adequately displaying our outrage and disgust at the savage destruction of innocent life, the death penalty deserves a defense.
Anyway, this whole controversy concerning the moral validity of capital punishment came to my attention the other day while I was watching television. A PBS program called "Frontline" had done a report on the true story behind the book "Dead Man Walking," written by Sister Helen Prejean, which was a primary source for the construction of Tim Robbin's movie of the same name.
This essay will discuss the various views regarding the death penalty and its current status in the United States. It can be said that almost all of us are familiar with the saying “An eye for an eye” and for most people that is how the death penalty is viewed. In most people’s eyes, if a person is convicted without a doubt of murdering someone, it is believed that he/she should pay for that crime with their own life. However, there are some people who believe that enforcing the death penalty makes society look just as guilty as the convicted. Still, the death penalty diminishes the possibility of a convicted murderer to achieve the freedom needed to commit a crime again; it can also be seen as a violation of the convicted person’s rights going against the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution.
Have you ever wondered why people are so interested to learn about the suffrage of others? Over twenty-five years, the population of prisoners has nearly sextulped. Reaching about 1.7 million since 1996, which is almost equal to the population to Houston, Texas, the fourth largest city in the nation (Elliott Currie). All we focus on is how they did it? and why? In other words, many people interpret crime as entertainment, and don’t think about the negative effects taking place in the world or even more that individual. In some cases the innocent are being accused of unlikely punishment but how do they determine? Considerably, the death penalty has been the topic of discussion these past years. This so called “penalty” is becoming the prime consequence in most cases. I think that the use of the death penalty as punishment is wrong because of the psychological effects it has on prisoners, time spent on death row in cases of innocents, and the costly outcome.
Since the 1700’s forms of the death penalty have been used for one reason or another, but today some disagree with this judicial practice. The death penalty is the ultimate punishment imposed for murder or other capital offenses, and in Alabama a capital offense is murder with eighteen aggravating factors. In 1972 the Supreme Court moved away from abolition, holding that “the punishment of death does not invariably violate the constitution” (Bedau, Case against 2). Since 1900, in this country, there have been on the average more than four cases each year in which an entirely innocent person was convicted of murder (Bedau 7) and because of these startling numbers people are against capital punishment. It is a horrible reality to convict an innocent person of a crime and even worse to put this person on death row. There are even more horrific stories, like the one of Roger Keith Coleman, who was executed in Virginia despite widely pu...
One of the most repetitive and controversial topics discussed in the criminal justice system, is the death penalty. Capital punishment has been a part of our nation’s history since the creation of our constitution. In fact, as of January 1st, 2016, 2,943 inmates were awaiting their fate on death row (Death Penalty Information Center). Throughout my life, I have always been a strong advocate for the death penalty. During the majority of my undergraduate degree, I was a fierce supporter of capital punishment when discussing the topic in classes. However, throughout many criminal justice courses, I found myself in the minority, regarding the abolishment of the death penalty. While debating this topic, I would always find myself sympathetic to the victims and their families, as one should be, wanting those who were responsible for heinous crimes to
Koch, L.W., Wark, C., Galliher, J.F. (2012). The death of the American death penalty. Lebanon, NH: Northeastern University Press.
It is this contradiction in policy that confuses criminals and undermines any crime deterrence capital punishment was intended to have. Many people favor the death penalty as reparation for the wrong done to a victim’s family; however, in most cases, closure is not the result. Losing a loved one, no matter how that person is lost, is unbearable, irrevocable, and shattering. Pain like this is shocking and the victim’s family holds onto the hope that the execution of the murderer will bring relief and closure. Nevertheless, when the execution day arrives, the pain is not eased. No relief can be gained, for their pain is an unavoidable, natural process of life. Victims’ families have found such groups as the Murder Victims Families for Reconciliation and The Journey of Hope, which oppose the death
There are many false impressions floating around through American society concerning the death penalty; this paper hopes to clarify some of the more prominent, noticeable ones.