The Death Penalty: Annotated Bibliography Principles Of Ethi ✓ Solved

7 The Death Penalty: Annotated Bibliography Principles of Ethic

The death penalty debate has been ongoing, with different parties holding varying viewpoints about its morality. The ethical factors that may help determine moral positions include whether the arguments can be supported by good reasons, the deterrence effect of the death penalty, and whether it serves justice to victims. Proponents must justify the moral significance of the death penalty with good reasons. The moral position of supporters is that it serves justice by executing murderers, while opponents argue that it disrespects human dignity and the absolute value of life.

According to Rachels and Rachels (2019), Elizabeth Anscombe’s non-consequentialist position suggests that moral actions should be judged by the factors informing the action rather than the consequences. Kant’s categorical imperative posits that actions are moral only if they can be universalized (Rachels & Rachels, 2019). Kant requires individuals to engage in actions applicable universally, irrespective of self-interests. The death penalty would thus be moral if applied consistently to all agents rather than selectively. Kantian morality assumes courts can accurately determine guilt, warranting execution for those found guilty of murder.

Cholbi and Madva (2018) discuss the Black Lives Matter movement's call for the abolition of capital punishment, arguing that it disproportionately impacts black communities. They challenge the notion of equal application of the death penalty and highlight implicit racial biases in legal decisions. Mann (2015) examines moral justifications for the death penalty, employing Kantian retributivism, but raises issues concerning its application to individuals with mental disorders. Although Mann seeks to justify the death penalty, his approach overlooks moral limitations, thereby sparking debate on retribution and the execution of innocent individuals.

Mbah, Pruitt, and Wasum (2019) assert that the death penalty impacts all involved, often failing to provide the expected healing for victims' families, presenting it as a cruel and unethical practice. Steffen (2010) explores the moral and spiritual challenges of capital punishment, noting its support in the U.S. and examining its retributive justification despite the criminal justice system's effectiveness being questioned. Sunstein and Vermeule (2005) evaluate whether capital punishment is morally required, describing it as "cruel" and interrogating its moral implications through Kant’s retributivism.

Paper For Above Instructions

The death penalty remains a contentious issue in contemporary ethical discourse, provoking varied opinions on its implementation and morality. Supporters of the death penalty argue that it serves as a deterrent for heinous crimes, provides justice for victims, and upholds social order, yet opponents contend it is a morally indefensible act that disrespects the sanctity of human life.

Proponents of capital punishment maintain that its deterrent effect helps prevent violent crimes. They argue that the fear of execution may dissuade potential offenders from committing capital offenses, thus enhancing public safety (Desai & Garrett, 2018). For advocates, the death penalty is not merely a punitive measure but a definitive assertion of societal values regarding crime and punishment. They posit that the severity of the penalty reflects the gravity of the crime and serves as a crucial tool in the legal system's arsenal.

However, the reliance on the death penalty as a deterrent faces significant scrutiny. Empirical evidence has shown mixed results, with some studies indicating that jurisdictions without capital punishment see no corresponding increase in violent crime (Cholbi & Madva, 2018). Critics argue that societal factors, such as socioeconomic conditions and access to education, play a more vital role in crime rates than punitive measures. Furthermore, there is a profound ethical dilemma in administering capital punishment—how the state decides which lives to extinguish raises questions about the moral authority to take life for punishment.

From an ethical standpoint, Kantian philosophy offers a lens through which to scrutinize the death penalty. According to Kant, moral actions must adhere to a categorical imperative, applied universally; in essence, one must only act according to that maxim that one can will to become a universal law (Rachels & Rachels, 2019). If the principle of retribution underlies capital punishment, then it must consistently apply to all individuals, regardless of race or socioeconomic status. The reality, however, highlights profound inequities, as studies suggest that marginalized groups, particularly people of color, are disproportionately condemned to death row (Mbah, Pruitt, & Wasum, 2019). This disparity calls into question the moral underpinnings of capital punishment as it operates within the legal system.

Particularly concerning is the moral dilemma surrounding wrongful executions. The irreversible nature of capital punishment presents an insurmountable ethical challenge: once a life is taken, it cannot be restored. Statistics reveal alarming numbers of exonerated death row inmates, showcasing that innocent individuals have been wrongfully convicted (Mann, 2015). This reality undermines the fundamental principles of justice, raising the question of whether any system is infallible enough to justify the death penalty.

Moreover, social contract theory, which argues that individuals consent to surrender some freedoms in exchange for societal protection, provides an avenue for discussion on the death penalty's place in modern justice systems (Rachels & Rachels, 2019). However, the death penalty appears contradictory to the social contract, as the state enacts a punishment that fundamentally undermines the contract's essential element: the protection of life. The act of executing criminals effectively transgresses the very agreements that societies strive to uphold, which is the acknowledgment of human dignity and the sanctity of life.

The American Nurses Association (ANA) explicitly opposes the participation of healthcare professionals in executions, asserting that such actions contradict the ethical imperatives of preserving life and dignity (Potera, 2017). Their insights reflect a larger ethical consensus in which the death penalty is viewed not just legally but morally contentious, particularly regarding how it dehumanizes both the executed and society collectively.

Consequently, the question remains: can a society that claims to value human life effectively justify a system that allows for its termination? Critics argue that the death penalty perpetuates a cycle of violence and fails to achieve genuine justice, a sentiment echoed in numerous scholarly works examining capital punishment’s ethical implications.

As a nation grappling with these ethical quandaries, alternatives need exploration. Countries that have abolished the death penalty often repurpose their resources toward rehabilitation and restorative justice measures, favoring life sentences over execution. Such approaches may appeal more reasonably to a society that professes to value redemption, affirming that punishment can still uphold justice without sacrificing the fundamental ethical principle of valuing human life.

References

• Cholbi, M., & Madva, A. (2018). Black lives matter and the call for death penalty abolition. Ethics, 128(3), 517-531.
• Desai, A., & Garrett, B. L. (2018). The state of the death penalty. Notre Dame Law Review, 94, 1255.
• Mann, W. (2015). The death penalty debate: A critical examination of the moral justifications for capital punishment. The University of Central Florida Stars, HIM (Dissertation).
• Mbah, R. E., Pruitt, T., & Wasum, D. F. (2019). Cruel choice: The ethics and morality of the death penalty. Research On Humanities and Social Sciences, 9(24), 14-22.
• Potera, C. (2017). ANA expands opposition to capital punishment. The American Journal of Nursing, 117(6), 13-14.
• Rachels, S., & Rachels, J. (2019). The elements of moral philosophy (9th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
• Steffen, L. (2010). The moral and spiritual challenge of capital punishment. Sacred Heart University Review, 19(1), 15-33.
• Sunstein, C. R., & Vermeule, A. (2005). Is capital punishment morally required? Stanford Law Review, 58, 703-720.