My piece on Oklahoma’s botched execution of Clayton Lockett has been heavily rewritten, combined with some other stuff, and published by The New Republic as “The three-drug death penalty cocktail is a mess.” (It takes about 2.5 hours to rewrite a website post for a column.)
If you love Professor Ceiling Cat, who has hearts on his boots, go over and give it a click, engaging in discussion if you’d like.
Oh, and I’ll be discussing this piece (and the morality of executions) on WDEL talk radio (Delaware) at about 11:45 Chicago time (12:45 p.m. Eastern time and 5:45 p.m. London time); you can listen live here (click on “Listen Now!” at upper left). It’ll be only a 4-5 minute interview, and the start time may be off a few minutes.
That’d be about 9:45 Arizona time…which I think is the same as California right now….
b&
(It takes about 2.5 hours to rewrite a website post for a column.)
And it makes the resultant article sound less like you. Do they get your permission to change it that way?
I’m the one who rewrites it. It sounds less like me on the site, but more like me when I’m writing for a magazine. You can’t use such an informal tone in a place like that.
(It takes about 2.5 hours to rewrite a website post for a column.)
And it makes the resultant article sound less like you. Do they get your permission to change it that way?
Read the article, but didn’t comment because it requires a sign-in and I sign in to too many things already.
I am opposed to the death penalty, but if it is to be used, I agree that the single-injection is the way to go. I’ve never understood why the three-drug thing took hold. But I am somewhat familiar with the fact that once something has become the official procedure, it’s really hard to change it! Religion and government definitely have that in common.
To visitors to this site,
Read, if you can, David Bentley Hart’s paper
Tsunami and Theodicy and try to figure out what he’s saying. To me it’s fancy gobbledegook. I have read Prof. Coyne’s piece on Hart.
William Stewart
Is it this?
His conclusion seems to be that God will make it all better in the next life because salvation. And turns it into a bit of preaching about “us” meaning Christians. Classy.
So he doesn’t actually answer any of atheists’ concerns about suffering in this world (and also that salvation isn’t relevant to people who don’t worship his god even if it exists as he says).
Pompously bloviating git.