Editorials

Although I’ve lived in California for more than half my life, I’ve never gotten used to the way the seasons crowd each other here. In the Midwest, where I spent my childhood and 12 years as a young adult, winter meant a decent respite from the seductions of the natural world. There was no stigma attached to sitting at home next to the fire with a good book, no feeling when you looked out the window that life was moving on and if you sat still you’d get behind. Here in idyllic northern California the narcissii, the first garden flowers in more normal climates, are part of the Christmas decorations. Our Christmas tree is still green, and we’re slow to want to take it down, but outside the salvia wagneriana and the primroses are in the midst of their spring show. The tree next door that I see from my desk is in full bloom. The rainy intervals are welcome, because it’s hard to reconcile yourself to indoor work when there’s so much going on outdoors. 

Another impediment to sober reflection on the meaning of life is the constant barrage of information on the state of the world which is available to anyone with a radio, television, newspaper or Internet connection. In case you’ve managed to miss it, the state of the world is pretty dire right now. Tsunamis in Asia, genocide in Africa, war in the middle east, terrorism everywhere—if you’re inclined to worry about such things, it’s hard to know where to start worrying. The number of deaths of innocent humans is immense, unimaginable for those of us who have been blessed with lives free of real contact with such events. Hearing about the enormity of these catastrophes feeds the natural urge to hibernate, to escape. 

It’s hard, therefore, to focus on the meaning of the death of a single human being who was in no way distinguished. The State of California this week executed one Donald Beardslee, who most likely killed two and possibly three women. As compared to the numbers of innocents who have died around the world this week, one more death seems hardly to make a difference. It’s all the more admirable, then, that a few hardy souls were willing to gather outside San Quentin this week to make the point once again that every death diminishes all of us.  

The struggle against the death penalty has been going on for as long as I’ve been politically conscious. My 1961 graduating class at Cal picketed its own graduation ceremony in caps and gowns because the speaker was Gov. Pat Brown, who had failed to halt the execution of Caryl Chessman despite pleas from around the world. Since then, most of the rest of the world has seen fit to abolish the death penalty as unnecessary and cruel, but it lingers in most U.S. states, perhaps a legacy of our cruel Puritan founders’ obsession with sin, sinners and punishment.  

Revenge seems to be the major reason for state-sponsored killing these days, since there’s no practical reason for states to choose the death penalty any more. Amnesty International and a host of other organizations have documented the fact that capital punishment is far more expensive than life imprisonment. One study done in New York estimated the cost of an execution at three times that of a life sentence. Capital punishment is more costly even if the post-trial appeal process is excluded from the calculation, if decent care is taken during the investigation and trial to prevent as many fatal errors as possible. Even with all that expensive caution, a lot of mistakes have been made which have lately been uncovered by researchers in New York, Chicago and other places. 

The anti-abortion and pro-choice forces are gearing up for a big protest and counter-protest in San Francisco on Saturday, the anniversary of the Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade. It would seem that if the anti-abortion people, who are coming in bus loads from all over the state, are really sincere in their respect for any and all human life, more than a few of them should be carrying posters mourning the loss of the life of Donald Beardslee and calling for the abolition of capital punishment. The pro-choicers ought to do the same, regardless of their differing beliefs about when human life begins. Both sides ought to be able to agree that revenge killings of mature human beings are no longer necessary or humane.  

In California’s eternal spring, it is all too easy to forget that being pro-life, as both sides claim to be, should also mean being anti-death. Perhaps those same stalwarts who kept the vigil outside San Quentin on Wednesday would be willing to set up a recruiting table at the event, as a reminder that all those who claim to care about human life in the abstract should take responsibility for caring about each and every human life.  

—Becky O’Malley?