EXOD440 ... the practice of capital punishment survives. The frontline in the fight against the death penalty is now focused on whether there is a constitutional manner of execution. We have come to realize that there is no nice way to kill someone. For now, lethal injection is legally acceptable, but even challenges to that practice continue. This leads us back to the basic question: Should the death penalty be abolished? Generally, I would say yes. But I hesitate. I sincerely believe that killing is wrong, and if it is wrong for the defendant, it is also wrong for the state. Yet, I am also honest enough to admit that there could be a case--something so heinous, so barbaric, and so unforgivable--that I would consider making an exception. The only example that comes to mind is that of a homicidal maniac like Adolf Eichmann. His butchery and evil was so colossal that Israel seems to have been justified in imposing the ultimate punishment upon him, the only time in the history of the State that it has done so. I wish I didn't have this exception in mind. I wish I could be the absolutist who says that I could never support the death penalty. I wish the Torah made it much easier on us with an absolute prohibition of, “You shall not murder.” (Exodus 20:13) but it doesn't. Instead, it provides that sometimes capital punishment is warranted. Why does it do this? Perhaps for the very reason that I leave open the possibility of the exception. Playing God isn't all we are doing when we decide whether or not to maintain the death penalty as a punishment in our society. We are also trying to decide how best to preserve human life overall. Exceptions to our opinions on this issue remind us that life and death matters are never easy. The law does not have answers to all of our questions. The important thing is that we keep struggling with this question: what kind of punishment will protect and preserve the overall sanctity of human life? (By Laurie L. Levenson, "Judaism and CriminalJustice".