Home Categories About
argument top image
Should the death penalty be abolished? Should the death penalty be abolished?
Yes, we should abolish the death penalty Yes, we should abolish the death penalty
No, we should not abolish the death penalty No, we should not abolish the death penalty
The death penalty targets racial minorities The death penalty targets racial minorities
The death penalty targets the poor The death penalty targets the poor
The death penalty targets people with mental illnesses or intellectual disabilities. The death penalty targets people with mental illnesses or intellectual disabilities.
Wrongful convictions are common Wrongful convictions are common
The death penalty wastes taxpayer money The death penalty wastes taxpayer money
The death penalty violates the sanctity of human life The death penalty violates the sanctity of human life
The death penalty deters crime The death penalty deters crime
The death penalty gives victims closure The death penalty gives victims closure
The death penalty administers justice because some people deserve death The death penalty administers justice because some people deserve death
The death penalty saves lives The death penalty saves lives
The death penalty affirms the value of human life The death penalty affirms the value of human life
Debate Mini Map

Should the death penalty be abolished?
Back to question

No, we should not abolish the death penalty

< (2 of 2)

The death penalty affirms the value of human life

By punishing human rights violations zealously, the death penalty affirms the value of all human life.
John Stuart Mill Albert Mohler
< (5 of 5)

The Argument

Human lives are invaluable. Because of this, we must treat every person’s life with dignity and respect. In committing heinous crimes, people treat invaluable human beings as if their lives are dispensable. They grievously violate their victims' rights, often subjecting them to torturous treatment and death. If our society claims to value its citizens, it must punish those who take human life appropriately. The only fitting punishment for such a grievous wrong is death. The death penalty sends a clear message: humans are valuable and taking another’s life is not an inconsequential wrong. In making this statement, it ultimately affirms the value of human life. For this reason, we should not abolish the death penalty.

Counter arguments

Our society should certainly value human life, and punish murder in a fitting way. However, this does not necessarily mean that we must retain the death penalty. Through giving life in prison sentences, we can continue punishing human rights violations, ensuring that our communities know life is valuable. In this way, we can send a clear message of value for all life- not just the victims' lives. Although many argue that the death penalty reflects value for life, it completely devalues the lives of criminals. Regardless of their past mistakes, criminals are people too. They deserve to be treated with dignity and respect. The death penalty reflects value for only certain peoples' lives and should be abolished.

Proponents

Premises

[P1] Human life is valuable. [P2] Because of this, we must punish people who take another's life. [P3] If we fail to punish heinous murder accurately, we fail to value human life. [P4] In certain circumstances, the only fitting punishment is a death sentence. [P5] For this reason, we must not abolish the death penalty.

Rejecting the premises

References

In the Wild

This page was last edited on Friday, 19 Jun 2020 at 02:17 UTC

Explore related arguments