I saw this item over at the America magazine blog “In All Things,” and thought it offered some interesting food for thought — particularly since it comes from my friend Sr. Camille D’Arienzo, RSM, who works with inmates on death row.

She dropped a note to the editor of the magazine making this point:

Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to try the accused 9/11 perpetrators in a civilian court near Ground Zero has ignited a national debate over whether the accused Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his companions should face a military or civilian court. Other concerns include the safety of the city, the opportunity for propaganda and the possibility of acquittal, based on waterboarding the men experienced in Guantanamo.

One matter not being debated is Mr. Holder’s determination to urge the prosecution to seek the death penalty for these mass murderers.

If the destruction perpetrated here had occurred in London, Paris, Rome or any other European city, the death penalty would not be debated either. It is not allowed in nations that form the European Union.

If the death penalty were forbidden here, life without parole would at very least deprive these mass murderers of presenting themselves as martyrs and us as their killers.

Any thoughts?