Sr. Helen and a "moratorium"

Thanks to Susan for the post about Sr. Helen Prejean's visit to St. Thomas.  I read her "Dead Man Walking" when it came out, and also had dinner with her as a first-year law student.  Although, over the years, I found myself disagreeing with some of what she said and did, I admire so much the way she managed to challenge us to respect the dignity, and hope for the redemption, even of those who do great evil, and also to remember the dignity of victims, and the pain of their families.

With respect to the "dignity of the human person" and the death penalty, it strikes me that there is this challenge, or tension:  On the one hand, Catholic abolitionism has embraced this "dignity" as the basis for the death penalty's immorality.  That is, Catholic abolitionists say that it is because of this "dignity" that it is wrong to execute even those who have committed horrible crimes.  On the other hand, I believe that this commitment to human dignity also requires Catholics to be skeptical of punishment theories that talk of punishment only in consequentialist or therapeutic terms.  If it is true that "human dignity" precludes execution, it is also true, it seems to me, that "human dignity" requires an appropriately retributive (i.e., desert-based) theory of punishment.

With respect to a moratorium, Susan says that if there is not a moratorium in effect, "there should be."  I agree, but with the caveat that any such moratorium should be imposed by politically accountable actors.