31.738
Bearbeitungen
Abolitionism: Unterschied zwischen den Versionen
→Reasons for Abolition
Tiao (Diskussion | Beiträge) |
Tiao (Diskussion | Beiträge) |
||
| Zeile 116: | Zeile 116: | ||
While Amnesty International considers most countries abolitionist today, there are some aspects which give less cause for optimism. For instance, the United Nations' non-binding resolution calling for a global moratorium on executions - adopted by the General Assembly in 2007, 2008 and 2010 - has had no effect whatsoever, and although the majority of nations have abolished capital punishment, over 60% of the world's population live in countries where executions take place, such as the People's Republic of China, India, the United States of America and Indonesia, the four most-populous countries in the world, which continue to apply the death penalty (even if, like in India, Indonesia and in many US states, they do so with some restraint). Each of these four nations voted against the General Assembly resolutions... | While Amnesty International considers most countries abolitionist today, there are some aspects which give less cause for optimism. For instance, the United Nations' non-binding resolution calling for a global moratorium on executions - adopted by the General Assembly in 2007, 2008 and 2010 - has had no effect whatsoever, and although the majority of nations have abolished capital punishment, over 60% of the world's population live in countries where executions take place, such as the People's Republic of China, India, the United States of America and Indonesia, the four most-populous countries in the world, which continue to apply the death penalty (even if, like in India, Indonesia and in many US states, they do so with some restraint). Each of these four nations voted against the General Assembly resolutions... | ||
=== | ===Fighting the Death Penalty=== | ||
*State has no | Demands for the abolition of the death penalty had come from Cesare Beccaria in 1764, from Quaker John Bellers (1654-1725) - who also argued for a European State - and a number of thinkers linked either to religious ideologies or to the ideology of Enlightenment. | ||
The basic arguments against the death penalty (which often were used in combination) were: | |||
*The State has no right to take the life of one of its citizens. This was either based on religion (to take a life should be a privilege of God not to be usurped by man) or on an interpretation of the Social Contract. | |||
The death penalty (capital punishment) can be seen as a violation of human rights. To deny the right to life is a serious challenge to the very idea of rights belonging to a human being. | |||
*Uselessness and Counterproductivity (Beccaria ... ) | *Uselessness and Counterproductivity (Beccaria ... ) | ||
*Irreversibility of wrongful executions. | *Irreversibility of wrongful executions. | ||
Protagonists and their Arguments: | Protagonists and their Arguments: | ||
*One of the first Quakers by the name of John Bellers (1654-1775) was critical of the death penalty, as was Cesare Beccaria (/1764), even if Beccaria allowed for the death penalty to persist in cases of high treason in the penal code of Lombardy at the late 18th century in the development of which he was involved. Beccaria founded his argument upon the social contract: nobody would agree to his losing his life in such a contract. German philosopher Immanuel Kant saw it quite differently, though. | *One of the first Quakers by the name of John Bellers (1654-1775) was critical of the death penalty, as was Cesare Beccaria (/1764), even if Beccaria allowed for the death penalty to persist in cases of high treason in the penal code of Lombardy at the late 18th century in the development of which he was involved. Beccaria founded his argument upon the social contract: nobody would agree to his losing his life in such a contract. German philosopher Immanuel Kant saw it quite differently, though. | ||
===Situation Today=== | ===Situation Today=== | ||