Debating the Death Penalty: Should America Have Capital Punishment?

References

Cite

Share

Abstract

ic use. In short, he seeks to join 1950s era functionalism with 1990s era gender theory and social movements theory, with possibly a bit of Jungian psychology thrown in. The attainment of such a vast theoretical project, even if considered separately from its application to the Promise Keepers, is well beyond the scope of Bartkowski’s relatively thin volume. The purpose and perspective of the book thus remain uncertain. Often, the book reads like a draft version that needs another revision or two to clarify the concepts, how they fit together, and how they apply to empirical observation. One particularly unintentionally amusing passage illustrates the draft-like quality, where he dramatically states that “For (sic) conservative Protestants, Jesus Christ is not a fictional character but a real historical personage. For that matter, most evangelicals believe that Adam, Eve, Moses, Paul of Tarsus, and others discussed in the Bible were real people . . .” (p. 36). Clearly, some “personages” in this list, such as Jesus and Paul of Tarsus were in fact real historical people. Academic and religious controversy does not center on whether Jesus existed. Rather, issues and arguments concern the nature of Jesus and exactly what message he, or any other scriptural figure, delivered. No serious scholar contends that Jesus, or Paul, never existed. In contrast, Adam and Eve are clearly metaphorical for many Christians, whereas for fundamentalists they are real, although not all conservative evangelicals are fundamentalists. Later chapters continue the list of possibly relevant concepts and possibly related observations, but likewise neglect an argument. For example, the PK are both in conflict with established religion, and supportive of it. Obviously true. Or the assertion that the PK define their movement in terms of gender. Obviously true. Or that the PK utilize popular culture to make the movement more appealing. Obviously true. Or that the PK seek to establish a kind of brotherhood. Obviously true. Bartkowski hits on these and many other important points about the PK, but does not assess them with any conceptual clarity or depth. The book is filled with obvious truths, yet despite a very competent bibliography, the book does not advance our understanding or knowledge of the PK. Overall, the book is accurate factually. However, it does not offer anything new factually or theoretically—only a suggestive list of what might be insightful. Bartkowski looks in many of the right places to understand the PK: religion, race, history, culture, gender, identity, emotion. Strikingly, perhaps as an outcome of his functionalist orientation, he never mentions the issue of class in regards to a movement composed almost entirely of middle-class suburbanites. There is no thesis with which to agree or disagree, nothing to inspire one’s sociological imagination. Those interested in the PK should consult previously published works, including Bartkowski’s several journal articles, which are excellent.