The recent botched execution of Christa Pike, a convicted murderer, has sparked renewed discussions about the death penalty. Nick Freitas, a host on BlazeTV, suggests that there are misconceptions surrounding the Christian viewpoint on capital punishment.
Freitas stated, “Whenever someone claims the death penalty is inhumane, I can’t help but think about the author of Leviticus.” He points out that this biblical text outlines various crimes for which the death penalty is considered appropriate, or, in some interpretations, even obligatory.
He expresses frustration, saying it seems somewhat disingenuous to label the death penalty as purely inhumane.
Regarding Pike’s case specifically, he details the gruesome nature of her crime, explaining, “She lured a 19-year-old classmate to a park, subjected her to torture, carved a pentagram into her chest, and even kept a part of her skull as a trophy.” He emphasizes that this was not just murder but involved premeditated torture.
Moreover, Freitas mentions that Pike attempted to strangle another inmate as well, challenging the assumption that incarcerated individuals lose the potential for committing further crimes.
He argues against the idea that one cannot support both pro-life and pro-death penalty stances, stating that it’s a “completely absurd argument.” He explains the essence of being pro-life as recognizing the innocence of a fetus, asserting that life begins at conception with distinct characteristics that separate it from non-living entities.
Freitas elaborates that a distinction exists between human lives that are guilty of crimes and those that are not. He questions, “How do we differentiate between the guilty and the innocent?” There’s an objective reality where a person who commits a crime is guilty, while an unborn baby cannot be considered guilty.
This discussion can be further explored in Freitas’s program, “Making the Argument with Nick Freitas,” available on various platforms.
