Execution: Just a part of life in Texas

Too busy today to craft any longer entries. I am working on a piece related to the discourses we employ to rationalize our positions on issues related of death, life, and choice and how individuals and groups seem to employ different discourses and conceptualizations of these when it suits their interests of a particular issue at hand. Namely, what does it mean to name yourself pro-life as it relates to the issues of reproductive rights and demonize those who favor coice as anti-life, and then advocate the ues of the death penalty? The piece is about the issues in a broad sense, as well as the now much publicized case of Troy Davis, a man convicted of murder and sentenced to death in Georgia 20 years ago. But I digress.

I'm posting this small entry to draw attention to what's scheduled to happen in Texas today. And though this type of event has become a frequent occurence in the Lone Star State, we can't allow it to become mundane.

Barring any unforeseen events, Terry Lee Hankins will be executed by the State of Texas at 6 PM tonight. Hankins will become the 200th person executed during the reign of terror known as the Governor Rick Perry administration. By comparison, during President Bush's term in office, 152 people were executed.

To be fair, Perry has served approximately two and a half years longer as Governor than did W; but being fair is not something either of these two men ever seemed interested in being. I do think it's fair to say that both men are fans of the death penalty and have demonstrated this by their frequent approval of murder by the state. Man, some days it's harder than others to wrap my head around the fact that I grew up in Texas.

In addition to the 199 individuals that were put to death under Perry, it is important to note that under his watch 35 people sitting on death row, previously convicted of murder and sentenced to die, have been exonerated by DNA evidence not presented during their trials.

Even if we disagree on the philosphical merits of state-sanctioned murder, it's pretty hard to disagree that juries and judges are people, and, as such, they make mistakes. And this says nothing about the mitakes of police officers, witness testimony, and the disproportionate number of people of color sentenced to death. And make no mistake about it; this issue, like all, yes all, others in America, is about race. That doesn't mean it's exclusively about race, but it is about race.

Hankins does not provide an example of possible mistakes in a conviction. Cases like his provide proponents of the death penalty with the kind of ammunition they need to make their case for continuing the practice. But whether or not he, or anyone else for that matter, did take the life of another, the fact that we so callously and casually pass judgement on the worth and value of another human being's life should make us pause for a moment and rethink the whole endeavor.

President Obama recently said that both opponents and proponents of a woman's right to choose should attempt to have dialogue, starting with identifying some common ground. That common ground, as it is so often said to be, is the shared desire to decrease the number of unwanted pregnancies (I hate that term, but it's what is used) and abortions. I'd like to think this same sort of thinking could apply to those on opposite sides of the death penalty debate. But as 6 PM looms nearer, and both the tally of individuals killed at the hands of the state and those cleared of wrongdoing continue to tick upward, I'm not so sure that ground exists.