A New Modest Proposal

There is a growing problem in this country that divides many of our good citizens, and places them against one another. Every American will agree with me when I say that the issue of the death penalty has become so brutal that it has perhaps even surpassed the severity of the death penalty itself. The infighting between American brothers and sisters has got to stop if we are to advance as a society toward working for the common good.

On either side of the debate, radicals have formed a stronghold over the opinions of good, moderate Americans who are being played like a cheap game of checkers. These radicals for or against the death penalty, or “players” if you will, are forcing the citizenry beneath them to jump over one another, consequently removing another good naive American out of the game, all in the players ever-lasting pursuit to king themselves and work their way around the board. This sort of game cannot be played when it forces Americans to fight each other. The issue over the death penalty must be resolved; these players must be removed.

Previous crusaders to end this war have suggested ideas that truly ran the gamut, but I have a solution that will end all fighting and will finally bring peace to this divided nation. Taking my influence from such great thinkers as Professor Grant Amiider, senior member of the Collation for Moral Order, and Dr. Robert Aston, president of the American Debaters Alliance, who’s works in various think tanks have left myself, and the entire problem-solving community, astonished, I have developed an end-all resolution that will heal all wounds and stop all bipartisan bickering from the Senate down to the not-so-friendly discussion in one’s favorite spirit-serving establishment.

As it stands, the death penalty has nearly 8000 “convicted” felons under its mighty talons, and has plans to gnaw away what’s left of the blinded face of justice. These eight thousand have been found guilty of either murder or federal espionage and are just spending the rest of their lives waiting to die. On top of this, there are over 280 million American citizens that are on the outside waging a brutal civil war over what to do with the death penalty. Now I would like to take that number and reduce it to zero, but since myself and my beliefs deal with reality, I have come to realize that zero is an impossible goal. So, instead I have proposed a goal of 267. This may seem to be a fairly large number when compared to zero, but considering it is a reduction of over 95,357,142.8%, I feel that this is an adequate substitute.

Many of my readers are probably asking themselves, “What is this solution to end all war?” Well my friends, it is quite simple, and it is a wonder why no one else has thought of it, considering its simplicity and ability to solve all debate over the death penalty. I propose that we, standing united just as the founding fathers of this great country did, legalize murder and federal espionage, commonly known as treason. I will give you a moment to let it all sink in.

With my groundbreaking resolution, it will be possible to end all conflict over the issue of the death penalty. Just as the late, great Dr. Aston once put it, “If we want to solve a problem, we must first eliminate the reason for it. If the problem be a legal issue, it is not enough to pass laws in order to fix it directly… We must find ways of indirectly mending the tear in the legal fabric.” I too will “indirectly mend” the woes of the American public and see to it that my plan of attack is carried out.

My reasoning is quite simply this: without crimes that require the death penalty, there will no longer be people who are convicted of these crimes, and without them, there is no need to argue over whether the death penalty is just. It is this subtle genius that will end all of the difficult and hurtful hostility between the players on both sides. However, my colleagues have found my subtlety to be a solution that is “too easy to work.” This is where the words of Professor Amiider are called into play.

“It is the simple explanation to a complex predicament that is always the answer, unless that predicament be far too complex for that simple explanation to be explained and solved in a way that is simply best for the common good. However, when this simple explanation is examined under a light of complexness, it will be found to be transparent, unlike a solution of great multifacetness