Resolved: Capital Punishment shouldn't be legalized

I agree with the definitions, but I would just like to clarify that capital punishment is "punishment by death for a crime. "I also agree that for the purpose of the debate it is best if we assume the penalty is for the most grievous of offenses. I would first like to start by looking at the purpose of punishment. In society laws exist to maintain order otherwise there would be chaos. Laws must be enforced or they would not be obeyed and again there would be chaos. When laws are broken there must be punishment to a. to show the rest of society that laws must be obeyed and b. to ensure that there is justice, because justice is a fundamental value vital to a civizlized society. The very basic idea of justice is to be fair, or as Aristotle defined it, justice is "giving each their due. " [1] When someone does good they are due a reward, and when someone does bad they are due punishment. It is important that the punishment match the crime. If the penalty for running a red light was only $1, there would be a lack of respect for the law requiring drivers to stop at a red light. This does not mean everyone would start running red lights. Some would not feel safe and would probably still stop at red lights. But I think it is fair to say that there would be an increase in drivers that run red lights, and in turn an increase in car accidents. On the other hand, if the penalty for running a red light was 5 years in prison, there would probably be a large decrease in the number of drivers who ran red lights. However, that punishment would be excessive, which means it is unjust, and therefore would undermine the purpose of the punishment. Because a punishment should uphold justice. I will now explain why capital punishment is a fitting punishment for the most extreme crimes. As agreed upon earlier in this debate we will assume the penalty is for only the most serious of offenders. Essentially it is for those who have committed extreme violent acts in which another human's life is taken. In these cases the only punishment that fits the crime is capital punishment. The reason it is called capital punishment is because it is considered the chief, or most severe punishment one can receive. Thus it is fitting that it be used for those who have committed the most severe crimes. Let us look at it as if it is an equation that we are trying to balance, because, again, the purpose of justice is giving each their due. Going back to my previous example a $1 fine is not equal to running a red light. In the same way locking someone up is not equal to them committing heinous acts of murder. If it were an equation it would be an imbalance, 1 life =/= 0 life. For the penalty to be just when such an act is committed, capital punishment is the only fitting penalty. Not using capital punishment in such cases is an injustice to the lives of the victims. It devalues and shows disregard for their lives when the perpetrator is not punished in a just manner. If capital punishment is done away with for an entire society, it degrades the value of life for that entire society. When the penalty for murder is lessened in degree, it shows a decrease in the value of human life. These are the basic reasons for which I argue that capital punishment ought to be a legal and accpeted form of retribution. Per my opponents request I will not discuss his arguments until the next round. Sources:1. . http://plato.stanford.edu...