A contemporary ethical issue. Capital Punishment. Research Paper

Name
Tutor
Course
Date
Capital Punishment
Introduction
Capital punishment also referred to as the death penalty is one of the most controversial debates not only in the United States but all over the world, with some countries and philosophers demonizing it and others particularly Asians, advocating for this type of punishment (Sethuraju et al. 1). The core idea of a death penalty is court sentencing an individual to execution for the heinous crimes they have committed, including drug trafficking, murder, terrorist acts, and religious crimes in some countries such as blasphemy, adultery and embracing other religious practices rather than the ones practiced in a particular country. For instance, some countries have executed people for practicing Christianity instead of Buddhism or Islam.
The death penalty has been around for the entirety of the human history, and it has been practiced to punish individuals who have committed crimes that are regarded as unforgivable in the society. In the ancient times, it was referred to as blood feuds and primarily involved members of a certain tribe killing a person who has done something significantly wrong to warrant death (Goel 152). Some of the earliest recorded types of capital punishment include the laws installed by the king of Babylon in the 18th century that permitted the death penalty to individuals committing crimes such as murder and adultery (DPICb). Some of the methods used to execute these individuals include crucifixion, burnt alive, stoning, and drowning.
While the methods of execution have dramatically changed, capital punishment is still practiced in some regions of the world. Today, in the United States, the death penalty is still practiced in 36 states where people found guilty of capital crimes are executed using different means. However, 18 states have abolished this form of sentencing and have replaced it with life imprisonment without parole (Sethuraju et al. 1). The death penalty is not the best form of punishment for heinous acts due to ethical issues surrounding it, and therefore, it should be abolished.
Kantian Theory of Punishment
According to Kant, a renowned philosopher, there is no any given country that can exist without laws. He states that without law, no society can exist. In turn, the formation of a state is not possible, indicating that legislation of rule is crucial (Hoffman 2). In his opinion, Kant suggests that if a person has violated the legislated laws by committing a crime, such a person deserves punishment. He indicated that punishment is a legal act that unquestionably has a particular basis and in this case, the basis is a crime. There should be no punishment if there is no crime and punishment of innocent individual is a product of an ineffective legal system that cannot distinguish between criminals and innocent people (Hoffman 2). According to Kant, the death penalty is only justifiable only in cases of murder. He indicates that if a person murders another person, they should also die.
Ethical Issues Surrounding Capital Punishment
However, despite Kant supporting an eye for an eye principle, there are a lot of moral questions that arise from the application of capital punishment, a reason why most people question its effectiveness and benefits to the society. One of the moral issues arising from this kind of verdict is respect for life (Stefanovska 48). Is government respecting the value of life when it subjects an individual to death? Is it morally right to kill a person for whatever reason? Human life is valuable, and no one deserves to be killed regardless of the crime they have committed. No human being deserves to be deprived of the value of their lives. Constitutions in most countries guarantee their citizens right to life, therefore, inflicting death on someone is unconstitutional and any sentence to execute an individual is not right. All individuals have the right to life, even those committing dreadful crimes and executing anyone on whatever basis is a violation of that right (Stefanovska 48). What complicates matters further is the entire process a person has to go through before the actual death penalty is conducted. It can take up to several years before one is executed as a result of the complicated legal systems handling murder, terrorism, and robbery with violence cases. Here the main question arises; is it right for a person to spend all those years and resources and finally receive a death verdict? In most cases, such long wait that individuals on death row have to undergo is sometimes extremely cruel, particularly in instances when the authorities are trying to extract information from a suspect using crude means. No human being should be exposed to such torture irrespective of their crimes. Hence, the value and right to life should be respected, and no one should be brutalized because they have committed crimes. Instead, other fair means such as a life sentence without parole should be applied because they give an individual a chance to reform (Stefanovska 48).
Another argument put forward by capital punishment proponents is that someone who has committed murder should also be killed. Some even refer to the bible and other religious views that God advocates for “an eye for an eye” philosophy. They contend that God Himself indicates that if a person has killed, they should also be killed by the cruelest means possible. However,...