With every cell of my being and with every fiber of my memory, I oppose the death penalty in all forms. I do not believe any civilized society should be at the service of death. I don’t think it’s human to become an agent of the angel of death.
Elie Wiesel (1928-2016)
Holocaust survivor and Nobel Peace laureate Elie Wiesel famously made the above statement in a 1989 interview for a death penalty abolition video that Amnesty International produced entitled: “Lighting the Torch of Conscience.” The over 4,100 members of L’chaim! Jews Against the Death Penalty, of which this author is a co-founder, firmly agree with the late Professor Wiesel, who serves as a central, motivating figure for the group. On this seventh anniversary of the October 27, 2018, Pittsburgh Tree of Life Synagogue attack, L’chaim vividly recalls its national campaign to mobilize the Jewish world against the death sentence that the United States Department of Justice ultimately handed down to antisemitic perpetrator Robert Bowers in August of 2023.
Resisting unnecessary state killings is an inviolable principle for L’chaim, whose members staunchly maintain that 21st-century Judaism must unconditionally reject any manifestation of the penalty of death. This red line has no historical or contemporary exceptions. It includes rallying against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his regime’s vengeful response to the October 7, 2023 massacre. Israelis must quash their government’s expressed hope of executing Hamas terrorists. They likewise must dissuade their elected officials from ending the current ceasefire and resuming the collective punishment of Palestinians, exacerbating the veritable genocidethey have already committed in Gaza. “An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind”—the adage often attributed to Mahatma K. Gandhi—doubtlessly applies in all these cases.
A Plea of Life from the Tree of Life
Joyce Fienberg (Idit Balt’chah bat Abba Menachem), Z’L, 75
Richard Gottfried (Yosef ben Chaim), Z’L, 65
Rose Mallinger (Rayzel bat Avraham), Z’L, 97
Jerry Rabinowitz (Yehuda ben Yehezkel v’Selma), Z’L, 66
Cecil Rosenthal (Sisel Chaim ben Eliezer), Z’L, 59
David Rosenthal (David ben Eliezer), Z’L, 54
Bernice Simon (Bayla Rachel bat Moshe), Z’L, 84
Sylvan Simon (Zalman Schachna ben Menachem Mendel), Z’L, 86
Daniel Stein (Daniel Avraham ben Baruch), Z’L, 71
Melvin Wax (Melvin Gadol ben Yosef), Z’L, 88
Irving Younger (Yitzchak Chaim ben Menachem), Z’L, 69
These are the English and Hebrew names of the eleven martyrs of the Pittsburgh Tree of Life synagogue shooting. The accompanying “Z’L” is an abbreviation for Zichronam Livracha, meaning “may their beloved memories be for an everlasting blessing.” Just as L’chaim members do not speak for murder victims or their loved ones, so too would they not deign to do so for the families of these eleven murdered human beings. As a chaplain, this writer regularly counsels mourners that when they grieve, they should allow themselves to experience the full range of human emotions, including rage and even the desire for vengeance, where applicable. Let no one ever judge anyone in such a position. If I myself were to lose a loved one to murder, I, too, might find myself advocating for the death of my loved one’s killer. A civilized society has a responsibility to protect and honor all such mourners, while also upholding the fundamental human rights upon which the world stands. Most basic to these liberties is the right to life. This mandate is one of the reasons why more than 70% of the world’s nations have abolished the death penalty in law or in practice.
To honor these victims of the 2018 Pittsburgh synagogue attack, L’chaim’s logo features the eponymous Tree of Life. That image serves as a reminder of L’chaim’s mission to extend the symbolic ethical roots of that tree of collective wisdom and morality to all human beings who are at risk of state killing. It calls upon the world to reaffirm the sanctity of life.
Governments would do well to follow the example of the inspiring Jewish community of Pittsburgh. In a profound example of that group’s unflagging steel resolve, it hosted a life-affirming parade to celebrate the dedication of a new Torah–known also as an Eitz Chayim (”Tree of Life”)–in loving memory of Joyce Fienberg, Z’L, one of the eleven Tree of Life martyrs, and her late husband, Dr. Steven Fienberg, Z’L. That sacred gathering brought new life to the exhortation that has motivated Jewish people for millennia: “Am Yisrael Chai”—“The People of Israel Live!” To this profound demonstration of the very best of Jewish values and resilience, the resounding response of the thousands of members of L’chaim was—and remains—to chant “L’chaim – to Life!” Annual donations from this Jewish abolitionist group to the Cecil and David Rosenthal Memorial Fund punctuate that impassioned plea.
Abolition Without Exception
Beyond the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting, L’chaim has extensively published its reasons for its non-negotiable stance on judicial executions. These arguments often begin with the inexcusable executions of innocent men and women. Arguably, the most famous comment in the Jewish canon on this subject comes from renowned rabbinic sage Rabbi Moses ben Maimon (1135-1204). Also known as the Rambam and Maimonides in Jewish tradition, he was a Sephardic Jewish philosopher who became one of the most prolific and influential Torah scholars of the medieval period. “It is better to acquit a thousand guilty persons,” Maimonides wrote, “than to put a single innocent one to death.” In the United States, jurisdictions have exonerated more than 200 death-row prisoners of the charges related to the wrongful convictions that had placed them on death row since the resumption of executions in 1977. This glaring fact – combined with the 1,647 American executions that have thus far taken place during the same period – only highlights the harsh truth of the killing of the innocent. Maimonides would have deemed this balance impossible to reconcile.
Other egregious realities about capital punishment include its justification through the fallacy of deterrence, its inevitable racist implementation, its inherent employment of psychological – and often physical – torture, and the unquestionable and unconscionable Nazi legacy of the execution methods of gassing, lethal injection, and the firing squad, to name a few. This last factor makes the death penalty particularly anathema for members of L’chaim, many of whom, like this writer, descend directly from Holocaust victims and survivors. For this group, use of such methods is an abject abomination.
There are accordingly no exceptions to L’chaim’s abolitionist position, including in Israel. It applies to the 1948 execution of innocent Israeli Defense Force officer Meir Tobianski, whom the Jewish State hanged and posthumously exonerated. It holds as well for Israel’s only other execution, that of infamous Nazi mass murderer Adolph Eichmann in 1962. L’chaim carries the torch of renowned Hebrew university philosophers Samuel Hugo Bergmann and Nathan Rotenstreich, scholar of Kabbalah Gershom Scholem, and Jewish theologian and philosopher Martin Buber, all of whom opposed Eichmann’s state killing, which Buber called a great “mistake.”Other Holocaust survivors themselves, such as Nobel-prize-winning author Nelly Sachs, voiced strident opposition to Eichmann’s execution.
The longstanding history of Jewish dissent to state killing continues in earnest today. Beyond its vigorous opposition to the Tree of Life shooter’s recent death sentence, L’chaim also advocated against death for the June 21, 2025, Israeli Embassy shooter in Washington, D.C., the assassin of Charlie Kirk just one month before this writing, and others. Its activism efforts also naturally have focused on Jewish inmates condemned to death, such as Nethanel ben Ziona Ghahremi, whom Iran hanged in 2024, and L’chaim’s pen pal Jedidiah Murphy, who became a lethal injection victim in Texas on World Day Against the Death Penalty, October 10, 2023.
Resisting Calls to Execute Hamas Terrorists
Just three days before Jedidiah’s killing, the Jewish world changed forever with the monstrous Hamas terrorist attack across Israel on October 7th of that year. The unjustifiable terror that Hamas unleashed on that day – born of that organization’s foundational mandate to destroy Israel – undoubtedly was an act of genocidal intent. In what constituted the worst attack on the Jewish people since the Holocaust, Hamas terrorists murdered 1,195 Israelis and foreign nationals, including 815 civilians, and captured 251 hostages, many of whom eventually died in unfathomable, grotesque conditions in tunnels underneath Gaza.
L’chaim’s mission to shine a beacon on the value of life remained unchanged in the wake of this unmitigated atrocity and hostage crisis. In the immediate months following October 7th, L’chaim marched for the safe return of the hostages, carrying posters featuring its Tree of Life logo, which emphasized the value of all human life. Following this guiding principle, L’chaim’s intentionally absolutist approach to capital punishment has always included convicted Hamas terrorists who perpetrated that monstrous attack. Members, therefore, deplore Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir’s recent moral regression of seeking to resurrect executions in the Jewish state, aiming to put to death those guilty of October 7th’s carnage and other terrorist acts. Doing so would only give ammunition for those who seek to equate the Netanyahu regime with the terrorism of Hamas, whose members continue to employ executions regularly across Gaza. The net result of such a policy would be to increase already rising incidents of antisemitic violence across the world.
There are even more specific reasons not to kill incarcerated Hamas terrorists. As a purely practical matter, imposing a judicial death sentence would provide them with a platform for their message. They would become heroes and potential martyrs, in addition to the already celebratory status they receive from many groups globally. Since Israel seeks to be a transparent democracy that follows the rule of law, particularly within its judiciary, a legal death sentencing scheme also would prove costly both financially and in terms of public perception.
Terrorists such as Hamas perpetrators of the October 7th violence believe in their cause, and that their spirits will receive ample rewards upon their physical death, whose prospect they welcome. A far harsher punishment is incarceration. Let them consider what they have done and why they endure the constrictions of a maximum-security prison every day. Lastly, there is an inherent flaw in the often cited notion that executing terrorists will save the lives of future hostages that the enemy might otherwise capture to exchange in a prisoner swap. On the contrary, the state killing of Hamas prisoners will only lead to that regime reciprocally executing future Israeli hostages and “collaborators,” perpetuating an endlessly violent cycle.
Finally, as a traditionally observant Orthodox Jew, Minister Ben Gvir surely should heed the most popular Jewish religious argument regarding capital punishment. He is likely well-versed in the words of Chazal, an acronym referring to the collective body of Jewish sages of the Mishnaic and Talmudic eras. Some of the loftiest figures among them were Rabbi Eliezer ben Azariah, Rabbi Tarfon, and Rabbi Akiva. The Talmud records what these scholars said of the death penalty:
A Sanhedrin [Rabbinic court] that affects an execution once in seven years is branded a destructive tribunal. Rabbi Eliezer ben Azariah says: once in 70 years. Rabbi Tarfon and Rabbi Akiva say: Were we members of a Sanhedrin, no person would ever be put to death. [Thereupon] Rabban Simeon ben Gamaliel remarked, they would also multiply shedders of blood in Israel! (Mishnah, Makkot 7a)
Indeed, there were dissenters—like Rabban Simeon ben Gamaliel above—who were pro-death, citing similar deterrence factors and other now antiquated notions of “justice.” Posterity can forgive them for their views, which reflect the understanding of their times, including when it comes to deterrence. They were not privy to recent meta-studies that have concluded that when it comes to deterrence, there is no demonstrable link between the presence or absence of the death penalty and murder rates. For this reason alone, most traditional Jewish arguments for the death penalty can no longer apply. Ben Gvir would do well to recall the aforementioned Talmudic passage and the current social science before assigning this deterrence fantasy to Hamas terrorists. The citizens of the most prolific executing nations – namely, China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, North Korea, and the United States—know very well that doing so only opens a Pandora’s Box of death.
Opposing the Gaza Genocide as Collective Punishment
The “death penalty” traditionally refers to judicial executions. The logic that underscores the objection to capital punishment, however, extends naturally to many cases of extrajudicial killings, and even to unjust war. This rational inference applies to the many members of L’chaim who stand firmly against any resumption of the Netanyahu regime’s now paused vengeful, genocidal campaign in Gaza.
Just as capital punishment invariably results in the killing of the innocent, so, too, has the Israeli government’s policy of collective punishment for the horrendous October 7th massacre led to the termination of tens of thousands of innocent souls, including innumerable children. It has also caused mass starvation, infrastructure devastation, resource annihilation, and other war crimes. It is as erroneous to call October 7th assailants “freedom fighters” as it is unconscionable to describe the Israeli government’s implementation of mass death and destruction in the wake of that notorious day as necessary for a “lasting peace.” Israel assuredly has a right to defend itself, but not through such inexcusable, egregious excesses. On October 7th, Hamas terrorists went to violent, murderous extremes to seek retribution against peaceful Israeli citizens for the undeniably unlawful mistreatment that Palestinians have endured since the establishment of Israel—their “Nakba”—in 1948. The Israeli government, in response, carried out an unforgivable policy of collective punishment that targeted Gazan citizens, killing them at a rate unmatched in modern warfare. Civilized humanity must reject the perpetrators of both of these genocidal approaches.
One must not conflate the intrinsically distinct issues of war and capital punishment. Opposition to the death penalty does not mean eschewing the steps deemed necessary for personal and national self-defense. Recall that it was specifically capital punishment about which Elie Wiesel famously said: “Death should never be the answer in a civilized society.” One should not interpret this to mean that Wiesel would have rejected fighting to stop the Nazi regime that exterminated his family and millions of his people. There is assuredly an appropriate time for war.
Still, the value of preserving life that inspires L’chaim’s abolitionist approach is enormously relevant during wartime. The moral reasoning underpinning L’chaim’s opposition to the death penalty is twofold: it is unjustifiable as an expression of justice, and its use as an instrument of revenge is never morally defensible. A different set of principles must pertain to a declared war, even when it so plainly features the revenge impulse, as is the case between Israel and Hamas. That military reasoning involves jus ad bellum (just war theory) and jus in bello (the laws of war). These rules maintain that warring parties cannot avoid all killing of combatants in the conduct of battle. Non-combatants, however, are another matter entirely. L’chaim – along with all of civilized humanity – demands minimizing civilian casualties as much as humanly possible during any armed conflict. The Israeli government’s prosecution of its recent war with Hamas patently has failed this most basic ethical prerequisite.
Under no circumstances whatsoever should either Hamas or Israel break the current precarious ceasefire and resume its genocidal approach to the other. Not even Hamas’ abhorrent resort to public executions to exert control justifies breaching the existing truce. Like Israel’s morally unacceptable, deadly pre-emptive strike against Iran earlier this year, the ends do not justify the means when it comes to disproportionate killings. As with capital punishment, such belligerent acts only affirm the fallacy of deterrence, while simultaneously fueling Hamas’ intention for revenge. Other peaceful, diplomatic means must prevail moving forward.
“A Tree of Life to those who grasp her.”
A longstanding anti-death penalty slogan asks: “Why do we kill people who kill people to show that killing people is wrong?” This paradoxical question has plagued the human condition since time immemorial, during periods of both war and peace. In response, L’chaim stands with Talmudic sages like Rabbis Tarfon, Akiva, and Maimonides, and modern Jewish human rights and philosophy icons Wiesel and Buber in disavowing the penalty of death “in all forms” whenever possible, from the execution chamber to the battlefield. L’chaim replaces these avenues of killing with the proverbial Tree of Life. The author of the Book of Proverbs exclaims: “She is a tree of life to those who grasp her.” (3: 18) May humanity, for the sake of its survival, choose never to let go of her branches.
This first appeared in the Jurist.
The post Opposing the Death Penalty in All Forms: From the Tree of Life to Gaza appeared first on CounterPunch.org.
From CounterPunch.org via this RSS feed