tor.nIn another case in our state, a youngnwoman (white) was kidnapped andnmurdered by three men (black) underncircumstances so heinous that thendeath penalty was handed down for thenringleader by a predominantly blacknjury. Again, within weeks the sentencenwas overturned by a judge on groundsnof a very minor technical violation innthe conduct of the trial. Many, manynsimilar instances have occurred.nI wonder if the opponents of thendeath penalty ever reflect on the damagendone to the morale and ethics ofnthe general public by this irrationalnfrustration of the most basic and legitimatenthirst for justice? And yet thensame smarmy liberals who again andnagain facilitate the release of those whonhave broken the first rule of the socialncontract, lecture us on our moral failingsnwhen half of us don’t bother tonvote and don’t show a sufficientnamount of indignation about thenhomeless or South Africa.nAnd the worst of it is that we havencreated a field of opportunity for politicalndemagogues. We now have beforenCongress a “crime bill” that providesnthe death penalty for a battery ofnfederal crimes. This is nothing butnfraudulent posturing. As Ronald Reagannwas heard a few times to remark,nthough he was too smug and lazy to actnon his insight: the federal governmentnis not the solution, it is the problem.nWe have a proliferation of crime notnbecause there are too few federal lawsnbut because the federal courts havendestroyed the rational functioning ofnthe state criminal justice systems wherenthe crimes that most affect us need tonbe punished. A federal crime bill doesnwhat does not need to be done andndoes not do what must be done.nWe have even had a call, from sondistinguished a statesman as SenatornD’Amato, for the federal death penaltynfor drug dealers. The federal governmentnregularly frees murderers but isnto prescribe death for dope peddlers?nUnder what principles of justice ornpublic policy are those who sell narcoticsnto willing buyers more worthy ofndeath than the wanton killers of innocentnpeople? Are the lives of drug usersnmore precious than those of murdernvictims? Such would seem to be thenunstated assumption. And why shouldnsomeone who kills a law officer in thencourse of drug business be any more ornless subject to death than someonenwho kills an officer in the course of anynother type of crime?nHere, as in so much else, our establishment,n”liberal” and “conservative,”nhas shown itself utterly unfit to rule. Ifnwe are to solve any of our problems, ifnwe are “to secure the blessings ofnLiberty to ourselves and our Posterity,”nwe must have a new agenda and anleadership that at least now and thennwill speak the truth.n— Clyde WilsonnAIDS, like abortion, seems to havendivided the religious community alongnconservative and liberal lines. Onenmight suppose, in a reasonably rationalnsociety, that the increasing availabilitynof contraceptives would reduce thenincidence of abortion. However, in thenUnited States at least, abortion hasnrisen dramatically with the availabilitynof contraceptives. Similarly, one mightnhave expected the rise of AIDS to havenreinforced traditional moralists in thenchurches, especially with respect tonhomosexual practices. Instead, manynof the so-called mainstream churchesnuse AIDS as an incentive to plead forngreater tolerance and understanding,nnot so much for those who practicenhomosexuality but for the practice itselfnand for the worfd and life view thatnendorses it.nVolker Eids, a member of the CatholicnTheological Faculty at the Universitynof Bamberg, Germany, calls AIDSn”a challenge to rethink [traditional sexualnmorality].” Eids does not want tonchange fundamental Roman Catholicnmoral teachings, but he does want tonchange the attitude towards homosexualsnand homosexuality: “It is necessarynto come away from received habits ofnattributing guilt and of prejudices.”nEids appears to be the most traditionallynminded writer in a collection entitlednBlack Angst: Living with AIDS (Stuttgart,n1989). His Protestant homologue,npsychologist and lay theologiannS.R. Dunde, who is on the board ofnseveral AIDS-related organizations,n-speaks about “the transformation ofnhatred for the sickness into hatred fornthe sick,” and says that “freedom ofnpleasure” (Lustfreiheit) is a mechanismnto incite hatred {Hassausloser).nDr. Dunde’s invective scores thennnchurches, church members, and Christiansngenerally as though they werenusing AIDS as a pretext for hatingnhomosexuals and intravenous drugnusers. Even a superficial reading of thenAIDS-related literature in Germanynreveals so much invective againstnchurches and religious institutions inngeneral that it might indeed be correctnto call AIDS a Hassausloser, but onenthat incites hatred for the church, notnon the part of the church. A typicalnconservative Christian response tonAIDS is that of Pastor HermannnMittendorfer of Stuttgart, who writes,n”The disease AIDS calls for renewednreflection on the relationship betweennlove, trust, long-term partnership, andnmarriage. . . . Without moralisticnfinger-pointing, we want people tonthink about the meaning of faithfulnessnas a constructive value.”nIn general, the Protestant churchesnof Germany have reacted to AIDS byntotally forgetting any and all traditionalnChristian teaching with respect to sexualnmorality and replacing it with annumber of Pollyannaish recommendationsnon the order of “wash your handsnafter using the toilet.” Thus PastorsnGerhard Gericke and Dr. Hans-nGeorge Wiedemann of Diisseldorfnprepared these suggestions for confirmationnclasses (for fifteen- and sixteenyear-olds):nIt is important to talk openlynwith future sex partners aboutnsexuality—as well as about whatnone has already experienced innthis area. “Going to bed withneach other” should be precedednby a longer period of gettingnacquainted. “Disco-style”nbehavior is frivolous and usuallynfrustrating. . . . Intensivelyntender forms of sexualityn(cuddling, caressing, nonaggressivenkissing, petting tonclimax) should be discoveredn(anew). Masturbation is notndangerous even in the companynof one’s partner. . . , Every onenof us is responsible for his ownnhealth, if he can do anything fornit, and equally for the health ofnothers.nNo doubt Pastors Gericke and Wiedemannnwould be delighted to have Dr.nRuth elected as the first woman bishopnin the German Lutheran church, hernDECEMBER 1991/7n