Capital Punishment
Should we kill killers is the question to answer regarding the controversial subject of capital punishment. There is strong support for both sides and many people have offered their opinions in writing for all of us to examine. John M. Olin, the Professor of Jurisprudence and Public Policy at Fordham University, gave us his Pro-Capital Punishment opinion in the Harvard Law Review in 1986. Although his article was written more than a decade ago the argued topics have not changed.
In his work The Ultimate Punishment: A Defense Mr. Olin addresses why he feels capital punishment is necessary in our society and across the world. According to Olin retribution is the number one reason for capital punishment. He goes on to say that the retributive notion of punishment in general is that as a foundational matter of justice, criminals deserve punishment and punishment should be equal to the harm done. What counts as “punishment equal to harm”? Olin refers to lex talionis commonly known as “an eye for an eye”. This idea was drawn from the Babylonian Law of Hammurabi from the 18th century. It states: If a builder builds a house for someone, and does not construct it properly, and the house which he built falls in and kills its owner, then that builder shall be put to death. If it kills the son of the owner, then the son of that builder shall be put to death. Besides being totally absurd there are a couple of points to make. First, retribution cannot be uniformly applied to every harm committed. What about rapist? Should they be raped? What about those who commit mass murder? How can we make their punishment proportional? The answer is we can not. Killing one person who killed another serves no practical...
... middle of paper ...
...ntly, especially if death is involved, then we need to stop, back up and say “what is going on here?”
Criminals no doubt deserve to be punished, and punished with severity appropriate to the harm they have caused to the innocent. But severity of punishment has its limits, both by justice and basic human dignity. Too many studies have shown that a lengthy sentence of 20 to 30 years of a murderer has been proven to be sufficient. After this period of time most individuals have proven to be constructive, worthy members of society and have lived prosperous lives after being released. I do however; recognize the fact that many individuals should stay in prison for the rest of their lives for the safety of all as well as retribution. For a Nation that is supposed to be founded on Christian morals and beliefs I have to wonder how they justify much of what they do.
In “The Classic Fairy Tales” by Maria Tator and “Mad Shadows” by Marie-Claire Blais, both texts deal with the idea that suffering and understanding are deeply connected. The authors aim to prove that suffering and understanding go hand in hand in order for change to occur. In “The Classic Fairy Tales”, Beauty and the beast, Snow White and Cinderella, will explore the relation between understanding suffering via transformation, desire, and physical injuries, when compared and contrasted with Mad Shadows.
The intricacy of a simple time telling device has sparked controversy about the creation of the universe. In William Paley’s “The Analogical Teleological Argument” he argues that the universe must have been created by a universe maker, God, due to its complexity. However, David Hume, provides an empiricist objection by arguing that one cannot prove the existence of a universe maker due to lack of experience regarding the creation of a universe. Ultimately, I will argue that Paley’s argument by design is not sufficient for proving God 's existence because, as individuals, we cannot assume that the world works the way we wish it.
Abigail Williams forms a continuous string of deceitful lies about the presence of witchcraft in Salem and her involvement with it, triggering the beginning of the trials and causing mayhem to permeate the town. Playwright Arthur Miller characterizes Abigail as "a strikingly beautiful girl, an orphan, with an endless capacity for dissembling"(8). Her fabrications induce calamity in Salem, and entangles many innocent people in her slanderous web of stories. In most cases, Abigail lies to evade discomfort or punishment. This pattern is first displayed when Reverend Hale interrogates Abigail:
Abigail Williams is manipulative and wants everything to go her way. She is the main character and causes trouble everywhere she goes. The Salem Witch Trials is about hearings and prosecutions of people who were accused of witchcraft. In The Crucible Abigail is a no good villain. Abigail first commits adultery with Elizabeth’s husband. Later on Abigail begins to accuse innocent people of doing witchcraft which causes them to die. Abigail Williams uses the Salem Witch Trials to put out all the resentment she has toward everyone.
“Most people in the U.S. want to do the right thing, and they want others to do the right thing. Thus, reputation and trust are important to pretty much everyone individuals and organizations. However, individuals do have different values, attributes, and priorities that guide their decisions and behavior. Taken to an extreme, almost any personal value, attribute, or priority can “cause” an ethical breach (e.g. risk taking, love of money or sta...
When it comes to choosing an argument for the existence of god I believe that Paley’s argument of creation and design is the best for proving that god does exist. In his argument Paley is suggesting that if we were to look at the world around us, we could easily come to the conclusion that it was not created by pure chance but, by a creator (a designer). Paley uses a watch and a rock in order to explain his argument. He mentions how if there was a watch on the floor and we have never seen it before, we would easily come to the conclusion that the watch could not have been made by pure chance but, some kind of intelligent design was put into it. He argues that when we look at the rock we do not so easily see the design, but it does not mean
...l punishment as a just and morally sound method of justice. After all, "An eye for an eye" seemed to be a rationale that many embraced as fair. Now there is an era of closer examination of what is truly just and morally ethical, as well as economically sound. A consequence needs to be fair, humane, and effective. Does capital punishment meet these criteria? There are compelling reasons to change the system we have blindly acclaimed. Hopefully we are in the process of implementing a new way of dealing with an age-old dilemma.
The Salem Witch trials of 1692 was an event that shaped the history of this country, as well as the lives of those whose wives and husbands were condemned to death. In order for such an event to occur, there must be a set of people who catalyze the event, and others who speak out against it. In “The Crucible”, certain characters help contribute to the rising hysteria of witchcraft, and others contribute to the disapproval of so many wrongful convictions. Throughout the endurance of Arthur Miller 's The Crucible, vengeance and the love for John play a big role in the actions and fates of various characters. Since Abigail Williams is motivated by John Proctor, her decision to lie and accused others of witchcraft resulted in the deaths of many people in Salem by the end of the play.
man from killing again then so be it. I don't know if it is immoral
One of the most controversial topics that affects the United States and other nations in
How can a girl who condemned seventy two to a death sentence and drank a charm to kill a man’s wife, a man she has slept with on more than one occasion be the victim? It’s possible when the town she lives in is worse than her. Although Abigail Williams is typically thought of as the antagonist of Arthur Miller’s The Crucible, she is in fact a victim as much as any other tragic character in the play.
The year is 1692 in Salem, a small town in Massachusetts, and the Puritans community is in serious trouble. In the story “The Crucible” by Arthur Miller, the Puritans community is in the Salem court where John Proctor admits to committing adultery to Abigail Williams who at the time was very young. Abigail Williams is where the court started after she is involved in the case where John Proctor is accused of committing adultery with her. Abigail also lead the girls and their witchcraft accusations in court. Abigail truly believed that John Proctor still had love for her.
Americans have argued over the death penalty since the early days of our country. In the United States only 38 states have capital punishment statutes. As of year ended in 1999, in Texas, the state had executed 496 prisoners since 1930. The laws in the United States have change drastically in regards to capital punishment. An example of this would be the years from 1968 to 1977 due to the nearly 10 year moratorium. During those years, the Supreme Court ruled that capital punishment violated the Eight Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. However, this ended in 1976, when the Supreme Court reversed the ruling. They stated that the punishment of sentencing one to death does not perpetually infringe the Constitution. Richard Nixon said, “Contrary to the views of some social theorists, I am convinced that the death penalty can be an effective deterrent against specific crimes.”1 Whether the case be morally, monetarily, or just pure disagreement, citizens have argued the benefits of capital punishment. While we may all want murders off the street, the problem we come to face is that is capital punishment being used for vengeance or as a deterrent.
When someone is legally convicted of a capital crime, it is possible for their punishment to be execution. The Death Penalty has been a controversial topic for many years. Some believe the act of punishing a criminal by execution is completely inhumane, while others believe it is a necessary practice needed to keep our society safe. In this annotated bibliography, there are six articles that each argue on whether or not the death penalty should be illegalized. Some authors argue that the death penalty should be illegal because it does not act as a deterrent, and it negatively effects the victim’s families. Other scholar’s state that the death penalty should stay legalized because there is an overcrowding in prisons and it saves innocent’s lives. Whether or not the death penalty should be
“An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” is how the saying goes. Coined by the infamous Hammurabi’s Code around 1700 BC, this ancient expression has become the basis of a great political debate over the past several decades – the death penalty. While the conflict can be whittled down to a matter of morals, a more pragmatic approach shows defendable points that are far more evidence backed. Supporters of the death penalty advocate that it deters crime, provides closure, and is a just punishment for those who choose to take a human life. Those against the death penalty argue that execution is a betrayal of basic human rights, an ineffective crime deterrent, an economically wasteful option, and an outdated method. The debate has experienced varying levels of attention over the years, but has always kept in the eye of the public. While many still advocate for the continued use of capital punishment, the process is not the most cost effective, efficient, consistent, or up-to-date means of punishment that America could be using today.