When a house has just lost its soul, a stricken silence falls over the sudden emptiness that no one will fill again. And all the noises that may be made later in that house will be like a scandalous din, ugly echoes from one room to another, from one corridor to another, sharp and discordant as if the walls are no longer able to absorb any music once the source of harmony has been taken away. But this strange detail about the power of death can only be picked up by ears that are very attentive to the smallest murmurs of life. Rational people go through these empty spaces with the serenity of a lawyer, and their indulgent smiles categorise you if you decide to point out in their presence that there is something lacking in the atmosphere.
Another argument raised against the death penalty stems from the irreversible nature of the punishment. In this regard, Bradley (488) asserts that the death penalty is vulnerable to cases associated with wrongful executions and provides no room to review the conviction. In this regard, Bradley suggests alternative forms of punishment with equal severity such as life imprisonment without parole. These alternative forms of punishment provide reasonable grounds for the death penalty to be abolished. For instance, life imprisonment without parole is equally severe and addresses the loopholes associated with the death penalty such as wrongful convictions.
Let us therefore mark the occasion of death as the moment simply to give thanks for the life of the departed. If we truly believe that the Objective of the Dogma will be achieved then we must be confident that the existence of the deceased will contribute to that success. In that faith we can rededicate ourselves to the discharge of our Duty, through a renewed determination to build the realisation of the Aim of the Society of HumanKind upon the work and achievements of all our predecessors, not just the one that might be specially in our thoughts.