Morality directs people to behave in certain ways and avoid behaving in other ways. Morality is “normative,” it is concerned with how people should behave, not just how they actually do behave. The categories to define the actions are 1. Morally Wrong, 2. Morally Right (a. Morally neutral or Morally permissible, b. Morally obligatory and c. Morally super obligatory). The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, is the infliction of death by the state as punishment for a crime (Boss pg. 223). In that case, if capital punishment is morally obligatory, it is something we ought to do. It is our moral duty and is required. Likewise, if capital punishment is morally permissible, it is something that is allowed to do but is not required. It is neither obligated nor prohibited. Defenders of capital punishment are consequentialists. They contend that the deterrent effect of capital punishment is significant and that it
…show more content…
He takes on the position of pro-capital punishment and argues his position in his article “In Defense of the Death Penalty”. Haag presents us two choices in regard to deterrence. The first choice he presents is that to trade the life of a convicted murderer and save the 7-8 innocent victims whose murder is probable unless that murderer is executed. The second choice is to allow the murderer to live and possibly lose the 7-8 innocent people who the murderer can possibly kill. Most of us would choose the first choice and Haag agrees. He argues that it would be irresponsible not to execute the murderer simply because there is no guarantee that their execution would help save the lives of potential innocent victims. Haag supports this argument by stating that “more severe penalties are more deterrent than less severe penalties”. People are less likely to commit severe crimes if the punishment is just as severe (Haag pg. 235,
He takes on the position of pro-capital punishment and argues his position in his article “In Defense of the Death Penalty”. Haag presents us two choices in regard to deterrence. The first choice he presents is that to trade the life of a convicted murderer and save the 7-8 innocent victims whose murder is probable unless that murderer is executed. The second choice is to allow the murderer to live and possibly lose the 7-8 innocent people who the murderer can possibly kill. Most of us would choose the first choice and Haag agrees. He argues that it would be irresponsible not to execute the murderer simply because there is no guarantee that their execution would help save the lives of potential innocent victims. Haag supports this argument by stating that “more severe penalties are more deterrent than less severe penalties”. People are less likely to commit severe crimes if the punishment is just as severe (Haag pg. 235,