p19cp Review of Ethics Article

Capital Punishment

By John Taylor; 2008 May 27, 11 `Azamat, 165 BE

 

Udo Schaefer, Some Aspects of Baha'i Ethics, Journal of Baha'i Studies, 16. 1/4. 2006

 

Udo Schaefer is among the most prominent living scholars of the Faith. I have enjoyed and profited from many of his erudite treatises on the intellectual implications of this Revelation. Over the next while I will be looking at some of the issues brought up by his article, "Some Aspects of Baha'i Ethics." This 2006 essay is a summarized version of a book that has since been published by George Ronald, I believe. He sets out to discuss the similarities and differences between Baha'i ideas about ethics and law, a subject that he is well qualified to talk about, since he is a retired judge. The pivotal paragraph in his discussion of the difference is the following:

 

"Whereas secular moral standards are based on the doctrines of individualism and liberalism, the Baha'i value system is balanced; it is -- and in this point more similar to Islamic and Confucian ethics -- less individualistic, less focused on the interests and rights of the individual and more concerned with the common weal. The Baha'i position derives from the basic political concept according to which the common weal and the security of the public have priority to the rights of the individual, notwithstanding the community's duty to respect and protect the unalienable rights of the citizen. Strong emphasis is placed on the `security and protection of men' the `common weal' and the `prosperity, wealth and tranquility of the people." (Schaefer, Some Aspects of Baha'i Ethics, p. 18)

 

This difference of emphasis, Schaefer goes on to say, can be seen in highest contrast in two examples, sexual ethics and penal law. These were chosen with great acuity. Let us summarize.

 The liberal model of today is of course sexual liberty, if it feels good, do it, as long as it is with a consenting adult and does not harm others. "Volenti non fit iniuria." The individual is free to choose his or her sexual orientation. So-called "ethical minorities" are legally protected to the extent that they can marry and (as is the case in Canada) even receive full widows and other pension benefits from government. The Aqdas, on the other hand, condemns extramarital sex, zina, as inherently immoral because it is "incompatible" with Baha'u'llah's "normative image of the human being."

 

As for penal reform, Schaefer points out that the leading model in Europe is rehabilitation of criminals. The Baha'i idea of the purpose of punishment, Schaefer holds, is retaliation and expiation. Baha'u'llah says that the "structure of world stability" is reared on reward and punishment in order to protect society. The touchstone of it all is capital punishment. Europe says that capital punishment is inherently wrong, the U.S. and its satellites say "hang 'em high." (Schaefer, Aspects, 19)

 

Now I have to say that right up until the late 1980's I would have agreed with Schaefer completely on this summary of the Baha'i position on capital punishment. I thought that that was the Baha'i position, based on what we had in the Codification of the Aqdas. Then our parliamentarians had a referendum on this issue and there were a spate of articles in the press about a practice that had been banned for decades in Canada, but they were considering bringing back, based on the example of our neighbours to the south. Although only my representative was voting, I did a lot of reflection on what I read and I came to the conclusion that indeed, killing somebody for a crime, no matter what it is, is wrong. It has nothing to do with what the person did, what is inherently wrong is that the state, on our behalf, perpetuates an atmosphere of violence and vengeance. To my satisfaction my Member of Parliament, and the parliament as a whole, voted against re-introducing this form of official barbarism. Once official murder is banished, this is how it should be; it should stay that way and be banned forever.

 

 

Then a few years later when the full text of the Aqdas was translated, I was surprised to see how mild the sanction of capital punishment is in there. In my opinion, Baha'u'llah institutes capital punishment in the same way that the Qu'ran institutes polygamy and slavery.

 

That is, He does not institute it at all.

 

What the Qu'ran does is it restricts an evil practice and carefully lays the groundwork for its elimination. In the case of marriage, it limits men to four wives, or the number that he can be "just" to. We know that the Master interpreted this as implying that you can only be just to one spouse, so in effect, it is legislating the end of multiple wives. Ditto for the Qu'ranic law on keeping slaves. It is not the fault of the divine law that Muslims have not thought deeply enough about the divine law to have seen that this was the intent. Same thing with Baha'is, if we think about this issue deeply enough, we will see that Baha'u'llah is not supporting capital punishment in the Aqdas, He is seeing to it that it will die out in one or two generations wherever His Laws are implemented.

 

And since the Law of God is for the whole world, not for the four nations in the world that have attained to the ethical nirvana of not only failing to kill citizens, but also contributing more than their pledge to helping poor nations -- that is, the four good nations are Holland, Norway, Sweden and Denmark. All the rest are, in my opinion, sunk in selfishness, corruption, perversion, evil, and in dire need of the "justice therapy" that the Aqdas prescribes. These four, by the way, were all exposed to the educational theories of J.A. Comenius, and two of them he actually lived in. That is why, every day, this man rises in my estimation. I really believe that Comenius is my missing link, the reason I have not been able to finish my book on the principles that has weighed on my shoulders all these decades.

 

So is Schaefer, the good judge, wrong in saying that "Baha'is believe in capital punishment"? Strictly speaking, no. Undoubtedly, there is provision in the law of God for this practice and God surely put it there for a reason. For one thing, there may be extraordinary conditions in the future, an act of terrorism causing mass destruction for instance, where not only the perpetrators but the whole of society may benefit from undergoing the shock of a state sanctioned execution. But unless very judiciously applied, shock therapy generally does more harm than good, as any reader of Klein's "Shock Doctrine" will not soon forget.

 

So notwithstanding and taken all in all, I do think that, considering the importance of mercy in the Writings, I would say that "Baha'is do not believe in capital punishment" is closer to the truth than the reverse.