Teresa Lewis is scheduled to die by injection tonight at 9PM at the Greensville Correctional Center. She was guilty of hiring two people to murder her husband and son-in-law, while they slept, for the insurance money. The two killers got life, she got the death sentence. There have been more than 7300 appeals to the Virginia governor. Should her life be spared because she's a woman?
Killing someone as a punishment for killing someone is nonsensical in my opinion, but what concerns me about this is not that the person is a woman, but that the woman is said to be borderline retarded. Under US law anyone with an IQ of 70 or less cannot be executed because that is considered to be 'severe mental disability'. It's been reported that Lewis had an IQ of 72. It's also been reported that there is new evidence that suggests Lewis was herself manipulated. How true those reports are I don't know, but I think those issues at least warranted a stay of execution.
I find it astonishing that the US State Department can protest against the execution of a woman by stoning in Iran, yet condone the execution of an (allegedly) borderline retarded person in the US. And I don't think the crime or method of execution matters. Killing someone in cold blood for a reason other than defence is either wrong or it isn't. If it is wrong, the state should not sponsor such killing. If it's not wrong, then the state shouldn't protest when others do it.
It can't be wrong for Teresa Lewis to conspire to murder, but right for the state to conspire to murder. Likewise it can't be wrong for the Iranian state to sponsor murder on domestic soil, but right for the US state to sponsor murder on US soil. I find the whole business repulsive, hypocritical and barbaric. Land of the free? Home of the brave? I don't consider killing a possibly mentally impaired human being in an act of state sponsored revenge as particularly liberating or brave.
No. As a woman myself I've seen some women who would shock you with the levels of depravity to which they'd sink.
I'd almost be willing to say - should men be killed because they're men? Women are meant to be the nurturing ones, while as a society we think more of the men as the abuser. So shouldn't we punish a woman who steps outside that role more harshly than a man?
It's a very sexist argument - what makes either sex worse when it comes down to their criminal acts?
I agree with you that a woman shouldn't be spared the death penalty because of her gender but I wouldn't punish her more severely because she stepped out of her "role".
Penalty should be based on the severity of the crime, not the gender of the person who perpetrated it.
I don't know the particiulars of this case, but it sounds like the two killers copped a deal in exchange for testifying against the woman who hired them.
No, gender should not be an issue, though I don't agree with the death penalty at all.
Whatever the punishment, it should be equal for both genders.
if some guy killed me then his punishment should be the same as if a woman killed me.
This shouldn't be hard to understand.
Well men dress to the left and women dress to the right . . .
Nice christian morals at work here - NOBODY should be executed period !!
by dingdong7 years ago
What do you think? It's still there - some controversies about gender equality and liberation! Islam? Hinduism? Share your opinions
by ScarletRyan19707 years ago
Hello, I was just thinking about the Holy Trinity.Three persons in God.The Father,Son and Holy Spirit. The third person,the Holy Spirit may be a women. ...
by qwark7 years ago
For the sake of engendering passionate, spirited responses, should the execution of murderers be televised?
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.