DEATH PENALTY is better than NO PENALTY

D.P. is Ethical1. The Doctrine of Double Effect holds that an action that causes a harm is ethically justified in doing so, if it brings about a good result. If a morally sound human were to endure the death penalty to bring about saving the lives of 50 morally sound humans, the execution could be performed morally and ethically. However, the people who endure the death penalty in our prison systems are not morally and ethically sound; they are murderers, rapists, torturers, and the most abject cretins on our planet. If their execution saves lives, it is not only morally and ethically justified, but morally obligated, because our moral status demands it.2. When self-defense is used by an individual moral agent against any justified or unjustified attack, that individual’s self defense is morally and ethically justified. Similarly, when one criminal commits a crime against society (e.g. murder, arson, rape, theft), he must be punished by that society in the manner the court deems legitimate. If a woman drowns all seven of her children in a bathtub, then murders and dissects her husband, then kills and eats the first two police who knock on her door, she has committed multiple crimes against society in an abject and morally outrageous manner. If sentenced to life in prison, she may kill inmates without proper justice being levied on her. She may be placed in a high-security prison where she would make the lives of the guards there a living hell. People who may commit murder think, “the worst that would happen to me is life in prison with better amenities than I have at home: television, three meals a day, and no bills to pay.” The death penalty justly punishes abject crimes against society, because they punish in the self-defense of society while simultaneously discouraging more heinous crimes.3. Justice demands that the death penalty be used. Human moral agents have moral status. That means we are worthy of moral consideration and moral rights. Humans have moral status, because they can objectively analyze actions to determine what is and what should be right or wrong, moral or immoral, thus indicating self-government and therefore: rights. When we violate our moral status by committing heinous and immoral crimes, we no longer are privileged to natural protection of our right to life. That is the reason why we all secretly wish for extraordinarily evil people to die: our moral status gives us moral aggression toward wrong action of people through retributive justice. This moral norm was discovered in light of an unchanging and objective set of moral principles that find their source in the realities of human existence. CHRISTIANITYThe consequence for disobeying the other commandments is death: All who curse their father or mother must be put to death. If a man commits adultery with another man's wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death. Leviticus 20:9-10Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed. Exodus 22:19ISLAMThe Qur’an states "Spreading mischief in the land" is deserving of the death penalty, these crimes:TreasonApostasy TerrorismLand, sea, or air piracyRapeAdulteryHomosexual behaviorIntentional murderHINDUISM In the Bhagavad Gita, there is the command to righteously destroy the wicked:"According to Vedic injunctions there are six kinds of aggressors: 1) a poison giver, 2) one who sets fire to the house, 3) one who attacks with deadly weapons, 4) one who plunders riches, 5) one who occupies another's land, and 6) one who kidnaps a wife. Such aggressors are at once to be killed, and no sin is incurred by killing such aggressors. Such killing of aggressors is quite befitting for any ordinary man,..." (Chapter 1, text 36)BUDDHISMTomoko Sasaki, "A basic teaching Buddhism is retribution. If someone evil does something bad, he has to atone with his own life. If you take a life, you have to give your own."Con hasn’t negated the resolution. Vote Pro!THANKS :DSPELLING ERROR: committed*