Caffeinated Politics

There is no dispute about the evil committed by Nidal Hasan. Thirteen people were murdered. Thirty-two others were wounded. Families were shattered. Lives were permanently altered by an act of calculated violence that deserves strong condemnation from our justice system. I think we all agree with that opening argument.

For me, and millions like me, there is no room for the death penalty in our society. A murderer may deserve severe punishment, but when the state deliberately takes a human life, it crosses a moral line that cannot be undone. Life imprisonment protects society, punishes the offender, and leaves room for correcting mistakes. More importantly, a civilized nation should be measured not by how harshly it treats the worst among us, but by whether it can uphold the value of human life even when confronted with those who have shown no respect for it.

Sadly, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth does not operate on the same moral plane. Worse, he sickeningly wishes to mix justice and spectacle. His desire to livestream Hasan’s execution by firing squad is vile and rancid and has rightly drawn condemnation from religious leaders across the ideological spectrum for a simple reason. Civilized societies should not transform death into must-watch programming.

Archbishop Paul Coakley, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, described the proposal as a “barbaric promotion of a culture of death.” Walter Kim of the National Association of Evangelicals warned that it risks turning an execution into a public spectacle. Krisanne Vaillancourt Murphy of the Catholic Mobilizing Network compared the notion to some of the darkest chapters of public punishment in American history. Whether you support capital punishment or oppose it entirely, those warnings deserve serious consideration.

The United States spent generations moving away from public executions precisely because they debased both the condemned and the spectators. Human suffering should never be mere entertainment and performance.

I am adamant about this matter not only because it is morally repellent, but also because our nation, already simmering with anger, should not be a witness to this murder. Every week, Americans learn of road rage incidents that turn deadly. Bar fights that become shootings. Online grudges that become real-world violence. Social media rewards outrage, humiliation, and cruelty. Why would our national leaders double down on such reckless behavior by showcasing online the bloodiest and most base action a government wrongly decides to take?

In other words, for the MAGA crowd that has made it this far and can’t connect the dots, let me ask a few questions. What possible civic purpose is served by broadcasting a killing to millions? What would the nation gain from watching bullets strike a human body? What lessons would young people learn? What darkness would be fed in a culture already struggling to contain its impulses toward violence? Let me answer it at once. There is no civic purpose. Period.

Call me old-fashioned, liberal, civilized, too bookish. But I believe that court proceedings and verdicts are tangible. The legitimacy of the system does not depend upon broadcasting the final moments of a prisoner’s life like a cheap beer-drinking sporting event.

The fact that anyone is seriously entertaining such an idea should alarm every American who still believes there is a difference between justice and bloodlust. Demand that your elected federal officials do not let this crazy idea proceed one step further.