No the problem is taking a single religious statement from that lady rationalizing what she and 11 others had done in a civil matter in a secular and using it as an excuse for another little smug Mudcat anti-religious jihad.

The death penalty laws and how they are enforced in Connecticut and that lady's religion are two very separate that happened to cross paths in that interview. In the article several jurors were talking about how the trial of a man who committed that horrible, nasty, evil spree of crimes affected them. One lady gave a religious viewpoint. Big deal. The death penalty is a legitimate reason for debate. How it personally affects one juror, is much less so.