Welcome Index | Sonoma County Free Press Home Page |Columns|Features

Last revised: June 8, 1999

Why do we, the American people, prefer--no, demand--a Big Daddy government who will punish us for every wrong move, every mistake, every chance decision that unfortunately turns out to be the wrong one? Why do we insist on uncompromising punishment, rather than a compassionate healing? Why do we want to destroy through vengeance rather than repair with love?

I see the punishing Big Daddy figure everywhere, from the individual families where the Man Of The House is ruler, and if a child dares to question his opinions, she/he is threatened with direct and instant punishment--emotional, psychological, or physical. And if the child cries, she/he is then threatened with more punishment. The accepted way of dealing with the pain/anger/fear exhibited by children who 'act out' is to spank, not ask what is hurting them. So many times I have heard a mother say to her child "If you don't stop that crying, I'm going to spank you and give you something to cry about!" How is that going to stop the crying? By making the child afraid of the mother?

And yet, that's what the justice system does too. When a woman writes a bad check because she can't find a job and has two children to feed, the injustice system brands her a criminal, a felon, an irretrievably BAD PERSON, and puts her into a maximum security prison for several years--thus destroying the family completely. In prison she is rarely taught any life skills to help her on her release, and when she gets out she has an ex-felon brand on her that makes it impossible to find a job so she can get her family back. Big Daddy has spanked her properly!

And what about the man who has grown up with physical and/or sexual abuse, has no idea what life would be like without violence, and who has self-medicated since he was a teenager to get away >from all the pain? When he eventually commits a violent crime, the media and politicians go into an uproar over how terrible he is. "Kill him!" they all shout. And Big Daddy will comply with the 'super spank' of the death penalty and do away with this naughty child--but the cause of the violence will never be addressed. Justice, which is stuck on its 'get tough on crime' rhetoric, has no intention of trying to lessen the pain of the desperate or abused and help them before the crime, or understand them afterwards.

With understanding comes compassion. Compassion! Why does this word seem so strange, and why do our politicians avoid it? If you admit to having compassion and are a politician, you have committed political suicide.

What has happened to this country where the mainstream votes for revenge justice? Is it in the very fabric of the country? Does it originate in the strict Calvinist doctrine that was brought here by the Puritans and became part of our foundation? The Calvinists believed that each one's placement in heaven--or hell--was predetermined, and those who did not exhibit the 'proper qualities' must be already damned. So there was no room for rehabilitation, restorative justice, or understanding a moment of desperation, because change was not be possible. Maybe that's the root of the problem--change. Can people change with more compassionate treatment, or are they hopeless and jail and punishment the only answer?

Maybe we need to listen more? When the baby cries, ask why instead of spanking. When our youth act out, ask why instead of throwing them into adult jails to be hurt even more. When a man or woman ends up addicted to drugs and turns to crime, ask how we can stop his/her downward spiral into more pain and violence. The violence brings the authority figure with the punishment, but is there any room in our society for a benevolent authority rather than a destructive one? I ask this as an invitation for dialog. How can we be different in our approach to 'justice', so that the pain on both sides of a crime is addressed?

---

Send Email to Charla Greene at Welcome to Hell

Sonoma County Free Press Home Page . Columns . Features . About the Free Press . Letters to the Editor . Supporters