"Honey, there are some really bad people in the world." This is the warning we routinely gave to our daughter as we instructed her not to respond to the initiatives of strangers. And it is surely the advice that parents everywhere give to their children. In the academic world, however, such advice is considered "simplistic." Many sociologists like to emphasize that human behavior cannot be reduced to categories of "good" and "evil." Why, then, do people do horrible things? Our Solomonic scholars inform us it is because something else made them do it. For years the fashionable opinion was that "society made them do it." Now the fashionable view is that "genes made them do it."
Let's examine these theories in light of the Connecticut murders. Joshua Komisarjevsky and Steven Hayes had a history of burglary: each of them had more than 20 prior burglaries on their records. Even if we assume that they were stealing out of necessity--a stretched assumption--that does not even begin to explain their actions in this case. They beat the mother, Jennifer Hawke-Petit, with a baseball bat and threw her down the stairs. Then they raped and strangled her. They tied the two daughters, Hayley and Michaela, to their beds, raped them, and then poured gasoline around them and burned them to death. The father remains hospitalized with head injuries. None of this extreme violence seems explicable on the grounds that the the two suspects needed to steal.
It seems equally absurd to say that genes made them do it. No one denies that our actions are influenced by our genes, but can any reasonable person maintain that humans don't have some degree of free will? Yes, there are reasonable people who say that, such as biologist E.O. Wilson and philosopher Daniel Dennett. According to these wise men, all our actions have biological causes and free will is an illusion. But if this is so, then all of morality is an illusion. Whenever we say to someone, "You should do this" or "You shouldn't do that," we presume that he has a choice in the matter. Ought implies can. However screwed up the murderers might have been, can anyone deny that they chose to do what they did, and consequently that they should be held responsible for their actions?
If neither society nor genes made them do it, what did? The third possibility is that they did it because they are evil. This option, so easily scorned by sophisticates, is actually the clearest and most satisfying description of the facts before us. This was an evil act, and it was done by some really bad people. Evil inspires indignation, and this indignation is not a mere emotional response but reflects a rational comprehension of the horror that has been perpetrated. The instinct that says "Give them the death penalty" is more than a call for vengeance; it is also a call for justice. We do not have the right to forgive crimes perpetrated against other people, only those perpetrated against ourselves. It is time to hold the bad guys responsible. I hope that Connecticut hasn't unplugged its electric chair.
Reader Comments ( Page 1 of 3)
1. Capital punishment is evil.
nik at 3:18PM on Jul 26th 2007
2. Inherent in each of us is the "natural" tendency to do what is considered evil/wrong/sinful. The teaching of old describes that the "natural" heart is at enmity with God. Is not subject to the laws of God and without change can not be...Influences by outside sources are real (Monkey see Monkey do). The story doesn't end there but an answer to the question of "genes"/free will exists. The beauty is that bad genes can be overcome by our free will...It's just that the free will must find its strength from outside oneself. Motivation to have a change of heart is experienced in many a life. Question, what would it take for you to have a change of heart??? A sick child, tragedy etc...
JIM LANSING at 3:51PM on Jul 26th 2007
3. I've heard the younger of the two men was adopted by a prominent family with a long history of accomplishments. If this is true, it gives one reason to support the genes theory.
Mary Hope at 4:20PM on Jul 26th 2007
4. I am with you, Dinesh. As someone who has faced a family being torn apart--twice--by deceit and betrayal, there are only so many times you can slam your head against the wall trying to find out what you could have done to make the other person NOT do what he did. When you watch your children being hurt by someone (especially someone who is supposed to love them) and that person oblivious to, or defensive of, their responsibility, you just come to a place where you are left with Good vs. Evil and some people just choose Evil. Sounds harsh, but otherwise what do we do? Keep on excusing and coming up with reasons? Give me a break. Some things are right. Some are wrong. PERIOD. To do the wrong things KNOWINGLY? That takes a deadened conscience at the very least.
Weary of the World at 5:11PM on Jul 26th 2007
5. I absolutely agree that capital punishment is barbaric and evil, but it is also a necessary evil.
As a man that had children with one woman, and a a divorced single father that raised some of the children apart from their mother, they all have the same genes, but there is a distinct difference in the children raised in my house and their mother's house. There is also a difference in the respect that my children show me in my house and how they treat their mother in her's. It doesn't matter which parent is having success and which is not; the gene theory should apply no matter what. Although my evidence may be anecdotal does not take away its emperical affects. I have first hand evidence that genes alone do not remove the freewill and individual choice of a person.
What the death penalty does is guarantees that the perpetrator will not be able to commit simular crimes again. I don't believe that the public is condemning the men; their own actions have condemned them. I didn't make them a murderer; their actions made them murderers.
Cdalealden at 5:21PM on Jul 26th 2007
6. Hang them high, put their sorry ass bodies in public out for enough days to scare the daylights of any loser wantabe killer to do such a crime as an example.
Take them down when their soul less bodies stink the town square or when the buzzards pick their slimy flesh to the bones. At least that is recycling...for the buzzards,
constance at 5:21PM on Jul 26th 2007
7. [[I've heard the younger of the two men was adopted by a prominent family with a long history of accomplishments. If this is true, it gives one reason to support the genes theory.]]
Plenty of people from prominent, accomplished families make lousy parents, so that really tells us nothing.
OomYaaqub at 5:44PM on Jul 26th 2007
8. They should be locked up and key be thrown into the Atlantic. The guys probably were on drugs. These murderers are evil people. They have no self respect and no self esteem. This particular crime, random it may seem deserves the extreme punishment. These people have no place in civil society. In feudal societies, they will be cut up into pieces. Atleast they have access to a fair trial in America. A thoughtful article Mr.D'Souza!
sushley, Rishi Kumar at 5:54PM on Jul 26th 2007
9. Evil acts should be punished. These two men should be given death sentences and quickly. If it were me, they'd be beaten and burned to death, but given our modern, humane society, the electric chair will do.
And finally, it is not helpful to our society to create and recreate crime shows where we see such atrocities carried out as enterainment on our tv's nightly. We are slowly being desensitized and even our courts aren't sentencing and punishing as they should.
Karol at 6:03PM on Jul 26th 2007
10. IF THIS IS A MATTER OF GENETICS, LET'S GET THESE TWO OUT OF THE GENE POOL PERMANENTLY.
IRONBLUEEYES at 6:08PM on Jul 26th 2007
11. Interesting. While I think it might be of interest to find out why these criminals did what they did, it certainly doesn't exonerate them from the horrific deeds they committed and the fact that a) they must be punished and b) they must at a minimum be removed from society forever.
As someone with a graduate degree in the liberal arts, I understand D'Souza's point. I have been taught repeatedly -- nearly ad nauseum -- that being judgmental is a bad thing. Past behavior is not necessarily an indicator of future behavior, according to popular academic theory. Rushing to judgment or assuming someone is a certain way based on their past behavior, demeanor, or language is considered simply uneducated and crude, even irrational.
So, out here in the real world, when I'm in my car and recognize that I'm in an ideal position for a car-jacking, and a man of unkempt appearance and a rather bold demeanor is approaching me from the side of my car, two thoughts simultaneously run through my head. One sense is to get the hell out of there immediately. However, the "trained" response would be to stop and rationalize and think: "Just because he LOOKS like a criminal and is ACTING like criminal does not mean he is a criminal. In fact, because I am in a potentially compromised position sitting here at a stoplight, I am probably over-reacting and reading too much into his behavior and appearance, causing me to be unnecessarily judgmental." Meanwhile, my other thought is still screaming at me to run the red light, NOW. To which thought do I listen?
Finally, my point: While it is good to give certain people a "second chance" and the popular theory of this time does have is usefulness at times, it's beyond ridiculous to apply it to such a situation as this one. Twenty burglaries indicates a major problem. There were probably other indicators, in behavior, perhaps speech, that revealed the disturbed mind of these people. The Virginia Tech shooter is similar example. Sometimes people have problems, and no matter how those problems originated, those individuals have to be dealt with accordingly.
eM at 6:32PM on Jul 26th 2007
12. Genes have nothing to do with something like this. There is no genetic imperative to take yourself out of society and thus out of the gene pool (these men knew they would be caught - the woman went into the bank and the police were alerted) - these guys never expected to get away. This was a spree crime. I suspect that the draconian justice system that would keep them living as low level janitors for life made them think "what have we got to lose?" and resentful of upperclass people who made all the right choices. This does NOT excuse their awful crimes but if it is genetics the message was to place themselves OUT of the gene pool which doesn't make sense.
john at 6:58PM on Jul 26th 2007
13. When we, as a society, have become so soft-headed as to fail to distinguish between "good" and "evil", we lose any hope for civilized behavior. How anyone with a history of more than 20 burglaries is allowed to walk free is an absurdity in itself; these were men with clear disregard for laws and for other people, and civilized society has not only a RIGHT but an OBLIGATION to remove such predators from its ranks. They had already demonstrated their willingness to commit crimes, yet they were allowed their freedom - only to demonstrate once again why their kind should have been permanentnly removed long before this.
These are nothing more than rabid animals, not to be given the benefit of another day's air and food. There is no possible "rehabilitation" for their kind, nor any rationale for keeping them alive. In truth, there probably was none before they chose to rape, torture, and kill. In other societies, they'd have been dealt with harshly enough after burglary #1 that they'd have never had the opportunity to commit more crimes, and that, unfortunately, is where our country continues to fail miserably.
sickened at 6:59PM on Jul 26th 2007
14. fill em with lead, then pray for their souls.
let the theorists work on the societal end of it later.
Mikey (English PhD)
michael white at 7:10PM on Jul 26th 2007
15. The whole "genes made them do it" argument only goes so far. Yes, some studies on brain activity for serial killers was different from a normal brain. There were some instances where there was barely a difference though. Some people are just plain evil and are aware of what they do. Some even express they enjoy it. This sends a chill down my spine. If someone does an evil deed then they should be treated like they are evil. No free pass of life in prison on my tax money. I will gladly pay out of my pocket for the death sentence. And for all you bleeding heart liberals who think that these evil people have "rights" and "feelings" too........ my opinion is that you should get to spend a week in the cell as a personal roommate with them. That is if you last that long.
E at 7:28PM on Jul 26th 2007