Ethical Perspectives On Maine's Policy Of Capital Punishment

1000 Words 4 Pages

There are multiple policies that man enforces. There is one policy that Maine does not enforce and that is capital punishment. Capital punishment is when a person is sentenced to death after committing a serious crime. This is enforced in multiple states throughout the nation. There are multiple ethical theories and concepts that can support and critique Maine’s policy of capital punishment. A person who commits a crime should have the chance for rehabilitation. This should be done through multiple therapies, and a place for someone to recognize that what they did is wrong. There are people who do not believe what they did is wrong, however with therapy they would be able to recognize why the act was too horrendous for living in …show more content…
The death penalty ensures that people do not have the opportunity to commit this crime again. These opinions come from their own upbringing, and the feelings that says someone who is commits an immoral act deserves the same fate that they created. They could also justify capital punishment by believing they are doing “God’s Will”, or accelerating karma, by killing the person who committed the crime. The fact that there is a difference in moral opinion shows the sociological relativism of the …show more content…
Tolerance “implies a universal duty to respect others, regardless of how we personally feel” (Boss, 2014, pg. 115). A murderer would be considered a person who does not deserve tolerance, however it is our moral duty to respect humans. A person who has done this action has their own reasons, and they may have the inability to recognize that their reasons are immoral. Does this mean that others should condemn them to death? It would be better to help them consider their actions, and become more acquainted with their moral compass.
The natural law theory states that “morality is universal and grounded in rational nature” (Boss, 2014, pg. 272). This would suggest that a person who is irrational is unable to recognize universal morals. For instance, they are unable to recognize that murder is immoral. This could be because of psychological, mental, or sociological disorders. This are all plausible reasons for why a person is unable to recognize their own moral codes. The basics of natural law theory states that prevention of death is universally

Difference Between Utilitarian Theory And Capital Punishment

An eye for an eye is a phrase used with retributive theory. Another theory that also is for capital punishment is the utilitarian theory. For a utilitarian there reasoning for capital punishment is somewhat different. They feel that capital punishment is justified by a purported ability to achieve future social benefits, such as crime reduction. The killing of a person is meant to deter future criminal from committing the same act because they can also be put to death.…

Words: 817 - Pages: 4

Analysis Of An Eye For An Eye By Stephen Nathanson

Stephen Nathanson, who wrote “An eye for an eye?” suggests the factual and moral beliefs about the death penalty are wrong and need to be strictly abolished. The passage states, “ A person’s actions, it seems, provide not only a basis for a moral appraisal of the person but also a guide to how he should be treated”. Also stated, “ What people deserve as recipients of rewards or punishments is determined by what they do as agents”. The argument claiming people should get a punishment based on what they do is accurate. What is not accurate however, is suggesting if someone murders another person, they should receive capital punishment.…

Words: 1234 - Pages: 5

The Death Penalty: The Argument Of Capital Punishment

If that murderer were then put to death for their crime, it would be a violation of his or her rights. Therefore, wouldn’t capital punishment be immoral? Bedau responds to John Locke’s theory concerning this matter. Locke’s theory is that when a person takes away another person’s life, they have then forfeited their own right to live. Bedau reacts by addressing that there are other options for punishment other than the death penalty, and that nowhere states that a murderer must be put to death.…

Words: 734 - Pages: 3

The Pros And Views Of The Death Penalty

The Death Penalty When thinking about justice, one might believe that if someone commits a crime, they should be held accountable. However, is the death penalty the right way to achieve this? I believe that the use of the death penalty should be discontinued, and from the lessons taught about this topic in class, my view has solidified. What the justice system is doing is morally wrong, as it is simply murder ordered by a government. It also goes against God’s teachings as He is the only one who has the right to choose whether someone lives or dies.…

Words: 827 - Pages: 4

Death Penalty Should Be Abolished Essay

The phrase is interpreted as if a person were to be attacked in a certain way by another person, then the attacker should suffer the same damage that they did to their victim. Hence, in the case of the death penalty, the murderer should be killed because he or she had killed another. This type of justice is irrational; it is basically a form of revenge for the people to satisfy their emotional desires. In addition to this, “killing as retribution is wrong because societies should hold themselves to a higher standard than that of individual murderers” (“Capital Punishment”). The eye for an eye clause is unnecessary and should never be the primary reason to kill a person.…

Words: 1603 - Pages: 7

Walter Berns The Morality Of Capital Punishment

According to Burns this punishment should be death, but what about the person’s fundamental rights 's to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Although Burns does not directly address it in this chapter, I believe he feels that when you commit a crime you lose these fundamental rights. But are these not fundamental rights that everyone is guaranteed under the Constitution? Their is no clause in the Constitution that says unless your a murder, you lose these rights. Allowing the government to legally kill the guilty person is wrong, and violates this person’s legal rights.…

Words: 1468 - Pages: 6

The Importance Of Abolish The Death Penalty

I agree with Nathanson statement that if we were to take a criminal’s life we are conveying him of being worthless and having no human value. I do not think we should have the option of doing that to anyone. Even though we may hate or have so much anger towards the criminal, we still should not take his life. Also Nathanson says we should respect human dignity and well-being, so we can punish people for the crimes they committed but we should not deprive them of everything which the death penalty does (Nathanson, p. 544). I also think we should abolish the death penalty because killing a human for what they did wrong such as murder, will not solve the problem or give the victim permanent relief, it will only be temporary and we are just as wrong as them when they committed the crime.…

Words: 1083 - Pages: 5

Capital Punishment: The Use Of The Death Penalty

People argue that the criminal deserves the pain and torture before they die because of the crime they committed. A human should not be tortured or put through any sort of physical pain for what they have done. Even the guilty have a right for life. To learn from mistakes and make a better life for themselves. Nick Gillespie states, “ The state’s first role—and arguably its only one—is protecting the lives and property of its citizens” (“Get Rid of the Death Penalty”).…

Words: 1142 - Pages: 5

Kant's Theory Of Capital Punishment

In criticism of my argument of the unsuccessful claim of retribution, Kant’s theory that retribution justifies capital punishment will be addressed, and I will in turn respond to the criticism. My first major reason for holding my position is that capital punishment cannot be justified by the three major punishment theories deterrence, retribution, and rehabilitation. They will be discussed and argued as to why they cannot justify capital punishment. Deterrence states that capital punishment is necessary in order to prevent future crimes of murder by instilling fear of death into the offender. But the argument is that the death penalty does not work because it does not deter future crimes.…

Words: 1040 - Pages: 5

The Philosophies Of Capital Punishment

This means that criminals should pay with a punishment that fits the crime. When it comes to retribution, the death penalty does not fulfill this philosophy of punishment. Retribution is immoral. Those who support retribution believe that punishment should be no more or less than the offender 's actions. However those who oppose retribution believe that the people who do us wrong don’t deserve the same pain.…

Words: 1986 - Pages: 8

Ethical Perspectives On Maine's Policy Of Capital Punishment

Related Documents

Difference Between Utilitarian Theory And Capital Punishment

Analysis Of An Eye For An Eye By Stephen Nathanson

The Death Penalty: The Argument Of Capital Punishment

The Pros And Views Of The Death Penalty

Death Penalty Should Be Abolished Essay

Walter Berns The Morality Of Capital Punishment

The Importance Of Abolish The Death Penalty

Capital Punishment: The Use Of The Death Penalty

Kant's Theory Of Capital Punishment

The Philosophies Of Capital Punishment

Related Topics

Ready To Get Started?

Discover

Company

Follow