31.738
Bearbeitungen
Abolitionism: Unterschied zwischen den Versionen
→Fighting the Death Penalty
Tiao (Diskussion | Beiträge) |
Tiao (Diskussion | Beiträge) |
||
| Zeile 119: | Zeile 119: | ||
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. | 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 ( | The basic arguments against the death penalty (often used in combination) were (and are): | ||
* | *Denying the State's right to take the life of a citizen either on religious grounds (only God has this right) or on political grounds (no citizen would agree to a Social Contract that gives the State this right, since that would be against the vital interest of the citizen). The latter argument was used by Cesare Beccaria, but refuted by Immanuel Kant. | ||
*Denying the legitimacy of the death penalty by denying that (1) it serves justice, (2) it is socially necessary, (3) it is socially useful. Sometimes it is argued that it is counterproductive: killing a person is a bad example that might lower the value of life in society and incite homicides instead of preventing them (barbarization of society). In cases of erroneous verdicts the death penalty is the only one that does not permit redress: a prisoner can be set free and compensated, but an executed man cannot be revived. | |||
* | |||
=== Why capital punishment persists === | === Why capital punishment persists === | ||