Abolish Death Penalty
Death Penalty should be abolished. We do not create life and neither do we have the right to destroy it. However as our societies progress towards an urban utopia it may become impossible to have some among us create the cause of distress to the wider society which may have to be contained for the larger good. Confinement in such cases is acceptable but not death penalty as practiced in many countries even today! ‘The Right to Live’ the fundamental right protected by the UN Human convention and also EU referendum is still being practiced by having amends!
Allowing criminals as the structured society defines them, could just be abnormalities that sometimes the society itself needs to weed out to sustain itself. But being considered a species of compassion and six senses! It would be our abyssmal moral view that would make us give capital punishment.
Though amnesty international’s support of this is bedded in the increasing number of innocent people who are handed out capital punishment, i would add to the moral and practical viewpoint to the same.
Many countries still practice it.. Did some reading on the view various bodies have on this matter and the most relevant one was what the Vatican has to say:
Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor. If, however, nonlethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person. Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm – without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself – the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity are very rare, if not practically nonexistent.
Except for Islam almost all religions are against it, only islam talks about vengeance and the right of the affected family to forgive and so on!
Note: Apparently 2007 was the year with maximum number of death punishments
Filed under: Politics
The Death Penalty: Not a Human Rights Violation
Dudley Sharp, Justice Matters
Some wrongly state that executions are a human rights violation. The human rights violation argument often comes from European leadership and human rights organizations.
The argument is as follows: Life is a fundamental human right. Therefore, taking it away is a fundamental violation of human rights.
Those who say that the death penalty is a human rights violation have no solid moral or philosophical foundation for making such a statement. What opponents of capital punishment really are saying is that they just don’t approve of executions.
Certainly, both freedom and life are fundamental human rights. On this, there is virtually no disagreement. However, again, virtually all agree, that freedom may be taken away when there is a violation of the social contract. Freedom, a fundamental human right, may be taken away from those who violate society’s laws. So to is the fundamental human right of life forfeit when the violation of the social contract is most grave.
No one disputes that taking freedom away is a different result than taking life away. However, the issue is the incorrect claim that taking away fundamental human rights — be that freedom or life — is a human rights violation. It is not. It depends specifically on the circumstances.
How do we know? Because those very same governments and human rights stalwarts, rightly, tell us so. Universally, both governments and human rights organizations approve and encourage taking away the fundamental human right of freedom, as a proper response to some criminal activity.
Why do governments and human rights organizations not condemn just incarceration of criminals as a fundamental human rights violation? Because they think incarceration is just fine.
Why do some of those same groups condemn execution as a human rights violation? Only because they don’t like it. They have no moral or philosophical foundation for calling execution a human rights violation.
In the context of criminals violating the social contract, those criminals have voluntarily subjected themselves to the laws of the state. And they have knowingly placed themselves in a position where their fundamental human rights of freedom and life are subject to being forfeit by their actions.
Opinion is only worth the value of its foundation. Those who call execution a human rights violation have no credible foundation for that claim. What they are really saying is “We just don’t like it.”
copyright 2005-2008 Dudley Sharp
Permission for distribution of this document, in whole or in part, is approved with proper attribution.
Dudley Sharp, Justice Matters
e-mail sharpjfa@aol.com, 713-622-5491,
Houston, Texas
Mr. Sharp has appeared on ABC, BBC, CBS, CNN, C-SPAN, FOX, NBC, NPR, PBS , VOA and many other TV and radio networks, on such programs as Nightline, The News Hour with Jim Lehrer, The O’Reilly Factor, etc., has been quoted in newspapers throughout the world and is a published author.
A former opponent of capital punishment, he has written and granted interviews about, testified on and debated the subject of the death penalty, extensively and internationally.
Christian Scholars: Support for the Death Penalty
Dudley Sharp, Justice Matters, contact info below
The strength of the biblical, theological and traditional support for the death penalty is, partially, revealed, below.
(1) “Capital Punishment: New Testament Teaching”, 1998, Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J., considered one of the most prominent Roman Catholic theologians of the 20th century. See bottom.
http://www.therealpresence.org/archives/Sacred_Scripture/Sacred_Scripture_014.htm
”There are certain moral norms that have always and everywhere been held by the successors of the Apostles in communion with the Bishop of Rome. Although never formally defined, they are irreversibly binding on the followers of Christ until the end of the world.” “Such moral truths are the grave sinfulness of contraception and direct abortion. Such, too, is the Catholic doctrine which defends the imposition of the death penalty.”
“Most of the Church’s teaching, especially in the moral order, is infallible doctrine because it belongs to what we call her ordinary universal magisterium.”
“Equally important is the Pope’s (Pius XII) insistence that capital punishment is morally defensible in every age and culture of Christianity.” ” . . . the Church’s teaching on ‘the coercive power of legitimate human authority’ is based on ‘the sources of revelation and traditional doctrine.’ It is wrong, therefore ‘to say that these sources only contain ideas which are conditioned by historical circumstances.’ On the contrary, they have ‘a general and abiding validity.’ (Acta Apostolicae Sedis, 1955, pp 81-2).”
about Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J.
http://www.mariancatechist.com/html/general/stjohnhardon.htm
http://www.therealpresence.org/archives/archives.htm
http://www.mariancatechist.com/html/general/fatherhardon.htm
http://www.saintphilomena.com/newpage4.htm
http://credo.stormloader.com/Saints/hardon.htm
(2) “The Death Penalty”, by Romano Amerio, a faithful Catholic Vatican insider, scholar, professor at the Academy of Lugano, consultant to the Preparatory Commission of Vatican II, and a peritus (expert theologian) at the Council.
http://www.domid.blogspot.com/2007/05/amerio-on-capital-punishment.html
A thorough theological repudiation of Pope John Paul II’s death penalty prudential judgements and of their improper inclusion into the amending of the Catechism.
“Amerio has the great gift of going to the heart of a subject in a few lines and very neatly distinguishes genuine Catholicism from imitations and aberrations.” “What makes Amerio’s analysis unique is that he restricts himself to official and semi-official pronouncements by popes, cardinals, bishops, episcopal conferences and articles in L’Osservatore Romano, from the time of Pope John XXIII to 1985 when the book was originally written.” (1)
titled “Amerio on capital punishment “, Chapter XXVI, 187. The death penalty, from the book Iota Unum, May 25, 2007
About Romano Amerio
http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/176565?eng=y
http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2006/02/romano-amerio-and-pope-benedict.html
http://www.latin-mass-society.org/2007/romanoamerio.html
http://www.angeluspress.org/oscatalog/item/6700/iota-unum
(3) “Christian Scholars & Saints: Support for the Death Penalty”, at
http://www.homicidesurvivors.com/2006/10/12/catholic-and-other-christian-references-support-for-the-death-penalty.aspx
(4) “Capital Punishment: A Catholic Perspective”,
by Br. Augustine (Emmanuel Valenza)
http://www.sspx.org/against_the_sound_bites/capital_punishment.htm
(5) “Capital Punishment: The Case for Justice”, Prof. J. Budziszewski, First Things, August / September 2004 http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles4/BudziszewskiPunishment.shtml
(6) Chapter V:The Sanctity of Life, “Principles of Conduct: Aspects of Biblical Ethics” By John Murray
http://books.google.com/books?id=phoqAAaGMpUC&pg=PA107&lpg=PA114&ots=mFvByHqGSy&dq=Murray+%22It+is+the+sanctity+of+human+life+that+underlies+the+sixth+commandment.%22&ie=ISO-8859-1&output=html&sig=ACfU3U1b0mdM3BfpNSXnhrwFYXaE_9Ij9A
(7) “Capital Punishment: What the Bible Says”, Dr. Lloyd R. Bailey, Abingdon Press, 1987. The definitive biblical review of the death penalty.
(8) “Why I Support Capital Punishment”, by Andrew Tallman
sections 7-11 biblical review, sections 1-6 secular review
http://andrewtallmanshowarticles.blogspot.com/search?q=Capital+punishment
(9) “The Death Penalty”, by Solange Strong Hertz at
http://www.ourworld.compuserve.com/HOMEPAGES/REMNANT/death2.htm
(10) “A Seamless Garment In a Sinful World” by John R. Connery, S. J., America, 7/14/84, p 5-8).
(11) “God’s Justice and Ours” by US Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, First Things, 5/2002
http://www.firstthings.com/article.php3?id_article=2022
(12) Forgotten Truths: “Is The Church Against Abortion and The Death Penalty”
by Luiz Sergio Solimeo, Crusade Magazine, p14-16, May/June 2007
http://www.tfp.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=957
(13) “The Purpose of Punishment (in the Catholic tradition)”,
by R. Michael Dunningan, J.D., J.C.L., CHRISTIFIDELIS, Vol.21,No.4, sept 14, 2003
http://www.st-joseph-foundation.org/newsletter/lead.php?document=2003/21-4
(14) “MOST CATHOLICS OPPOSE CAPITAL PUNISHMENT?”,
KARL KEATING’S E-LETTER, Catholic Answers, March 2, 2004
http://www.catholic.com/newsletters/kke_040302.asp
(15) “THOUGHTS ON THE BISHOPS’ MEETING: NOWADAYS, VOTERS IGNORE BISHOPS”,
KARL KEATING’S E-LETTER, Catholic Answers,, Nov. 22, 2005
http://www.catholic.com/newsletters/kke_051122.asp
———-
Religious positions in favor of capital punishment are neither necessary not needed to justify that sanction. However, the biblical and theological record is very supportive of the death penalty.
Many of the current religious campaigns against the death penalty reflect a fairly standard anti death penalty message, routed in secular arguments. When they do address religious issues, they often neglect solid theological foundations, choosing, instead, select biblical sound bites which do not impact the solid basis of death penalty support.
Footnotes:
(1) Books: ‘Iota Unum: A Study of Changes in the Catholic Church’, by Romano Amerio, Fr Peter Joseph (reviewer)
IOTA UNUM: A Study of Changes in the Catholic Church in the 20th Century
by Romano Amerio (English translation by Fr John Parsons)
(Sarto House, USA, 786 pp)
Reprinted from AD2000 Vol 9 No 8 (September 1996), p. 14
———————
70% of Catholics supported the death penalty as of May, 2oo5, Gallup Poll, Moral Values and Beliefs. The May 2-5, 2005 poll also found that 74% of Americans favor the death penalty for murderers, while 23% oppose.
copyright 1999-2008 Dudley Sharp
Permission for distribution of this document, in whole or in part, is approved with proper attribution.
Dudley Sharp, Justice Matters
e-mail sharpjfa@aol.com, 713-622-5491,
Houston, Texas
Mr. Sharp has appeared on ABC, BBC, CBS, CNN, C-SPAN, FOX, NBC, NPR, PBS , VOA and many other TV and radio networks, on such programs as Nightline, The News Hour with Jim Lehrer, The O’Reilly Factor, etc., has been quoted in newspapers throughout the world and is a published author.
A former opponent of capital punishment, he has written and granted interviews about, testified on and debated the subject of the death penalty, extensively and internationally.
Hello Dudley,
Lets for a moment accept that Death Penalty is indeed not a Human rights violation.
But i would like to point out a few things about this whole thing:
1. A lack of a proper argument does not necessarily amount to the disputed point being lost by the person.
2. What do you uphold by giving capital punishment? You commit the same crime of killing a person which you opposed in the first place.
2. In capital punishment what are you trying to say? The crime is the sin or the sinner? If its the sin then you can’t commit the same either! And if its the sinner then you become one by giving him capital punishment!
If you notice the stand of Vatican, i think that whats more closer to logical reasoning and unbiased.
Sometimes it does happen that we cannot allow some people to stay between us for reason of propagation of violence or crime, but if reasonable options of isolating the person is available then they should be adopted and i think in our current times confinement prisons exactly help us do that!
One mans violence is another mans justice! That exactly is what is the message that we would be sending out if we are pro capital punishment!
You may want to reconsider your thought towards capital punishment.
thanks,
Danile writes:1. A lack of a proper argument does not necessarily amount to the disputed point being lost by the person.
Sharp replies: I agree.
daniel writes: You commit the same crime of killing a person which you opposed in the first place.
Sharp replies: That position may be both amoral and immoral. Equal actions do not mean equal meaning or morality. Kidnapping does not equal incarceration. Fines do not equal theft. Rape does not equal making love.
We execute guilty murderers who have murdered innocent people. For those who don’t know the difference between crime and punishment, guilty murderers and their innocent victims, this may be confusing. For the rest of us, it is easy to understand.
The moral confusion exists when people blindly accept the amoral or immoral position that all killing is equal. For those who believe all killing is morally equivalent, they would equate the slaughter of 6 million innocent Jews with the execution of those guilty murderers committing that slaughter. They would also equate the rape and murder of children with the execution of the rapist/murderer. Fortunately, most folks really do know the difference.
daniel writes: If you notice the stand of Vatican, i think that whats more closer to logical reasoning and unbiased.
sharp replies : I know it was. It is contrary to reason and nearly 2000 years of biblical, traditional and theological teachings.
daniel writes: Sometimes it does happen that we cannot allow some people to stay between us for reason of propagation of violence or crime, but if reasonable options of isolating the person is available then they should be adopted and i think in our current times confinement prisons exactly help us do that!
sharp replies: We execute people for the same reason that we incarcerate them, we find those sanctions to be just and appropriate for the crime committed. Why don’t you equate legal incarceration to a kidnapping, after all both are against the will of the “kidnapped” person.
daniel writes: One mans violence is another mans justice! That exactly is what is the message that we would be sending out if we are pro capital punishment!
sharp replies: There really is a moral difference between crime and punishment. That is why it is unreasoned to equate kidnapping and incarceration, executions and murder.
danile writes: You may want to reconsider your thought towards capital punishment.
sharp replies I have. I used to be against the death penalty. I found all arguements against the death penalty to be either false or, on any given subtopic, the arguemenets for the death penalty were stronger than those against.
Thank you. dudley
One simple question that Mr. Sharp does not answer. Does the US execute the people who create the most social damage? The answer, of course, is no.
To: Dahn Shaulis, aka Vegas Quixote, vegasquixote, theamericaninjusticesystem and anonymous
Thank you for this additional opportunity to enhance pro death penalty positions.
1. Does the US execute the people who create the most social damage?
REPLY: Yes, as murder is the worst crime. This is, subjective, in the sense that I consider murder the worst crime, thusly creating the most social damage.Others may have different standards, regarding such damage. Many more deserve the death penalty. But just because many, who deserve the death penalty, don’t get it, is not a reason to not give it in those cases where murderers do deserve it. Less justice is not what we want.