COLUMNIST

As both the city of Boston and the nation begin to recover from the devastating attack at the Boston Marathon and the ensuing manhunt, we are forced to decide how to react to the Tsarnaevs.  Dzhokar Tsarnaev, 19, has been accused, along with his deceased brother, of creating and setting off two pressure-cooker bombs, killing three and wounding over 180 people. He survived the gun battle that killed his brother and is now responding to questioning from officials.

President Obama’s administration  has chosen, since Tsarnaev is a naturalized U.S. citizen, to prosecute him within the federal court system rather than by a military tribunal; he has not been been read his Miranda rights, however, which investigators claim is legal due to a precedent for “public safety exceptions.” He has been formally charged with using a weapon of mass destruction to kill, and he could be sentenced to death if convicted.

It is for others to argue over the legalities of the method of his interrogation, the setting for his trial and even the ethics of the death penalty if that is ultimately his sentence.

At this point in time, I am more concerned with how we, as individuals, will choose to react to Tsarnaev.

How do we understand the man responsible for the murder of innocents?  How do we respond to the man who designed a bomb that intentionally caused the mutilation of countless runners and spectators, as 51 survivors remain hospitalized and three are in critical condition?

Our immediate reaction is understandably to believe that his actions warrant our hostility; we might think he is a monster.  However, we should recognize that he is still a human being and refusing to give in to the temptation to hate.

Dzhokar may represent the worst that mankind has to offer, but he is still human. Our common humanity is not erased by his horrific actions but instead calls us to respond with love, not hate.

A refusal to hate is not, as some would characterize it, a weak form of tacit approval; love must not be understood as mere toleration.  To love is to seek the good of another, and in this case, being held responsible in the court of law will be best for Tsarnaev.

Love allows us to respond constructively to this tragedy, while hate paralyzes and destroys.  Tsarnaev will not raise the dead, heal the wounded or console their families; only deeds motivated by love will be able to begin to treat our national wound.  Terrorists expect Americans to respond with hate, but we need to recognize that by hating we only damage ourselves.

In the words of Booker T. Washington, “I shall allow no man to belittle my soul by making me hate him.”