non-homicide crimes against individual persons, even including child rape, on the other."
He also went on to say that while the latter may be "devastating in their harm they cannot be compared to murder in their severity and irrevocability."
Raping a child is not as serious as killing someone? I beg to differ. Yes, by murdering someone, the victim's family is deeply affected; they may harbor anger or hatred for the murderer and believe that the murderer deserves to die. I can understand that completely, I think he/she should die too. The hardest thing for them will be to move on, but it can be done. People die all the time, and it's hard, it's very, very hard, but it is possible for us to move on.
But by raping a child, the victim's family is just as deeply affected, they may harbor anger or hatred for the rapist as well, but at least the victim is still alive, right? Wrong. That child has to deal with what happened to them for the rest of their life. Even if he/she goes to counseling, gets all the help that is available for him/her, there is a very, very slim chance that that child's going to grow up normal. Chances are that child will never have a healthy sexual life, will never feel "normal", and in the worst cases, become a child molester or rapist themselves. The victim's family could be able to move on, just as well as the murder victim's family could, but the child has little or no chance of moving on. By being raped, that child's emotional strength has been destroyed. That child, even with great counseling, can't recover from that. They can seem well and healthy, but I don't believe they ever can be.
I believe the Supreme Court needs to take another look at this issue, and seriously consider what they're allowing to happen by outlawing the death penalty for raping a child. If you want to read more about this decision check these links out: The New York Times and The Washington Post