Why Is Capital Punishment Morally Wrong

The death penalty has been considered one of the most severe punishments by governments. However, recently, many people have rebelled against the death penalty. The death penalty is an act that is similar to being ruled under fascism instead of democracy. Under the rule of democracy, citizens are responsible for the acts of other fellow citizens, which can be inferred that crime is caused by the lack of responsibility in society. The victim's loved ones suffer due to the victim's death. It is understandable that they would want the murderer dead, but society often does not work that way. People need to think on behalf of the society.

Capital punishment is never morally justified, and feminist, progressive and socialist ethics would always consider the social and family environment that produced the criminal in the first place, including poverty, racism, segregation or other types of oppression. It would also examine ways that society could be reformed on restricted in ways that would reduce oppression, such as ending the ghettoization of minorities or the extreme inequality between rich and poor in the United States. Indeed, inequality is more extreme in the U.S, than any other Western nation, the prison population is larger and the social safety net much weaker. These conditions have worsened during the present recession, particularly for blacks and Hispanics. Among Western nations, only the U.S. still practices capital punishment even though there was a moratorium in 1967-77 because of Supreme Court rulings. Feminist ethics would also emphasize caring, community, empathy and interpersonal relationships instead of morality based on following rules and regulations (Volbrect 17). Their response to the death penalty as well as war and other forms of public or state-sanctioned violence would therefore be pacifist, and demand social, economic and cultural change rather than punishment of perpetrators.

Sister Helen Prejean, the writer of the biographical account “Dead Men Walking”, advocates strongly for the abolition of the death penalty. The non-fiction work is based on her experience being the spiritual advisor of Sonnier and other inmates on death row. Prejean believes that if people know the truth about executions, they will oppose them. In her essay “Memoirs of a Dead Man Walking”, she openly opposes the death penalty. There are four reasons for her to oppose death penalty is immoral as. Firstly, it is a torture. Secondly,, it does not work out as a deterrent. Thirdly, and it costs more than life imprisonment. Finally, only the poor sentenced to death. She believes that the death penalty is immoral as it is a torture, it does not work out as a deterrent and it costs more than life imprisonment. However, I disagree with her argument, because death penalty is not seeing as a torture in history, Super Court and those criminals deserve the retribution; death penalty help deters crimes and poor cannot be the reason to escape the law.

For many years, there has been a debate of whether or not the death penalty is morally justified. This debate has centered on whether humans have the right to take the lives of other human beings and has long divided people politically and socially. People who are in favor of the death penalty believe that, “Intentionally taking the life of an innocent human being is so evil…the perpetrator forfeits his own right to life”(Pojman, 232). Pojman is unambiguous about murderers as evildoers who do not deserve to live. On the other hand, people who are against the death penalty believe that it is morally wrong to take anyone’s life even if that person committed a heinous crime. The consequences of each position may determine its feasibility.

Capital Punishment is not a fair choice to do and it violates the human right to life. Everyone is born with the human right to life, even those who commit any type of crime; sentencing a person to death and executing them violates that right ( ). Just because a murderer killed someone, it does not mean their life should be taken away for punishment. It is generally accepted that people should not be punished for their actions unless they are guilty ( ). Whether the person is guilty is guilty or not they should not be given a deadly punishment. He inmates should just be locked up in prison and die from natural causes. When the prisoner becomes executed it is painful and cruel.

The topic I chose to present on was the ethical arguments surrounding the death penalty. The death penalty as defined by Merriam Webster is "Punishment by death; the act of killing people as punishment for serious crimes". The method for execution is determined by the courts, the people harmed and by the state. Each state has their own laws regarding death penalty and methods of carrying it out, vary. The death penalty is reserved for serious crimes of which include rape, murder, and treason. Capital punishment, in its many forms is not at all unique to the United States, as many other countries carry it out also. There are many ethical concerns surrounding death penalty as well as arguments from both sides to whether or not death penalty

The man, that hasn’t done anything wrong, is put to death. Convicted for the killing three people he didn’t even know but, yet they still believe it was him. Though there was very little evidence. Before the man was strapped to the gurney he mumbles a few simple words “ I thank,you mother. For giving me the life that I have lived.” within a few minutes the man is dead from three doses of three different substance.The man accepted his fate. This year let alone six states killed people on death row with Texas killing the most, thirteen people. The US sees it as a way to get rid of the criminals who have destroyed everyone hopes and dreams, but the way some people see it is more sentimental. The way they believe is that the will pay for their

The Death Penalty is wrong, because death is bad no matter who does it. It is bad if the Government kills someone with a lethal injection. It is about the same as someone murdering people. This Essay will talk about things that are believed and things that have been researched. These facts are irrevocable mistakes, no legalized murder, and it is a little effective that it scares criminals.

Do you think the Death Penalty is good for our society? My opinion on if the Death Penalty is good for our society would be no and we the people are the ones who can give our reason on why.Also the government is the issue because they believe in the Death Penalty the Death Penalty could connect and tie into the eighth amendment which says and I quote There can no excessive bail or fines, no cruel and unusual punishment. The Death penalty violates one of the most fundamental principles under widely accepted human rights law that states must recognize the right to life I'm going to give you my reasons why. My first reason on why we should not have the Death Penalty would be that it affects the economy according to my research it cost about

There are plenty of things that society considers to be wrong, and murder is one of them. If a person murders someone, the possible legal ramification that follows is the death penalty. Death penalty or capital punishment is the legally authorized killing of someone as punishment for a crime. When government sanctions a criminal to death, they typically use lethal injection, lethal gas, and, in some places, electrocution. The death penalty was not common in America until Europeans arrived to the new land with their practice of capital punishment. The first recorded execution in America was that of Captain George Kendall in 1608 for being a spy for Spain. Back then, minor offenses such as stealing grapes, killing chickens, and trading with Indians would result in death penalty (“Introduction to the Death Penalty”). For the last few years, death penalty has created a big controversy, which had caused states to change their laws. Heyns and Mendez report, “the U.S. is still one of the five most prolific executing countries in the world” (Heyns & Mendez). Besides being more expensive than keeping someone in prison and a way to get revenge, capital punishment has plenty of errors, like racial bias and ethnic discrimination. It also does not serve the cause of justice, and innocent people are sentenced to death. Even though death

Since 1973, 153 people have been exonerated from death row. To exonerate means to take away from death row or to let the accused individual go. The death penalty should be abolished from all over the world once and for all for many reasons.

As a person I have learned how look at both sides of an argument and the death penalty is no exception; while both sides in the argument have their marit, my personal view on the subject matter is that this penalty is wrong. There are three major reasons why. The first reason just the sheer amount of tax money it takes to put someone through the death penalty. One person takes thousands of dollars more then to keep them alive and in prison. The next reason is that people can change. In reality, many people will not, but I know for a fact some do. My aunt worked in a prison for 40 years and had become friends with some of the inmates; one of her inmate friends has been in the prison for almost as long as she has worked there due to being

Imagine being convicted of a crime, a serious crime, and waiting for the moment of execution. Moments pass like days, or even weeks, and the waiting begs the question; is it ever morally right to take another’s life? Every day innocent American citizens find themselves on death row crimes they did not commit. In a tremendous act of hypocrisy, the criminal justice system murders people to prove to society that killing is wrong. Capital punishment is said to be able to sweep the nation’s streets from crime. It has made no changes to deter criminals and lower the rates of crime. Since, capital punishment does not deter crime, it is immoral, unjust, and opens possibilities of the execution of innocent people.

The controversy that surrounds the use of capital punishment argues issues that surround the death penalty, but not the death penalty itself. I believe that those who sit on death row are reserved for criminals who commit the worst acts and deserve to have their life taken. These criminals should not be given a second chance, because the life that was taken did not get a second chance. Those who are given the death penalty show the result that they are a danger to society, and they shouldn’t have the possibility of hurting any more people. One could argue that justice would be served while the criminal stays behind bars, two wrongs don’t make a right, and by committing the same offense that the criminal had done while saying it’s okay to do the same only because the state says it’s acceptable. I believe that keeping the death penalty is a morally justified action and is supported by Utilitarianism and the greatest happiness principle. The death penalty is something that should only be used for brutal and premeditated crimes, because of its effectiveness to deter crime, receive retribution, and give closure for victim’s families.

Killing the innocent intentionally is at least usually wrong. According to Kant theory, this statement would fit auger well to his Kantian ethics theory. This is because his theory explains actions such as murder are prohibited no matter how much happiness the act could bring it is prohibited. Kant theory the rightness or wrongness of an action does not depend on the consequences but the intention or one’s duty. Therefore if an action that a person want to do would not like everybody else to do or would not like it to be done to them then it is wrong (Ebenstein, 1991).