As I have said before, if it was my call, based on personal prejudice rather than the need to look at things like precedence, the rule of law etc, I would have let al-Megrahi rot in gaol if he is guilty of the murder of 270 innocent people.
Because the rule of law is above personal prejudice, however, I suspect that the justice secretary of any makeup of a Scottish Parliament would have come to the same conclusion as that made by Mr MacAskill, so the political posturing on the issue is rather sick.
The sickest posture that I heard in the debate today came from Tory leader Annabel Goldie.
Ms Goldie suggested that Mr al-Megrahi could have been released on bail to serve his dying sentence out in a Scottish hospice.
Hospices provide a haven in which people with terminal illnesses can die in peace. They tend to have no "visiting policies" they keep "rules" to a minimum, they are relaxed and allow terminally ill people the space in which to die in a loving and caring environment.
If one of my loved ones happened to be passing his or her last days in a hospice, I just wouldn't want him or her to share that last dwelling place in life with a notorious terrorist. Full Stop!
The thought that I might have to go through a cordon of policemen, to be stopped and searched; even to be refused entry because of youthful misdemeanours, whilst my granny, my parent, my spouse or my child lay dying there is absolutely sickening!
Did Ms Goldie think this posture through before she proposed it in the Scottish parliament? Or is she just a heartless bitch who couldn't give a damn about the others who might have had to share the hospice with Mr al-Megrahi? Or is she more interested in political one upmanship than the care of those living out their last days in the bosom of the Scottish Hospice community?