THE MORALITY OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

A Research Report Submitted to the Faculty of Engineering University of Santo Tomas

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Course PHL 5 (Christian Ethics)

Malenab, Glenne Marie Manalo, Duane Mangrobang, Lew Andrei Marcos, Ma. Katrina Gaylord Morelos, Milo Nava, Jervin Kent Ochoa, Harbin Joseph Pangan, Rosario Carmina Section 2-6

9 October 2010

THE MORALITY OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

I. Introduction A. Definition B. Types of death penalty i. Lethal injection ii. Gas chamber iii. Electric chair iv. Firing squad v. Hanging vi. Stoning vii. Beheading viii. Crucifixion II. Ideas contrary to capital punishment A. Value of human life B. Right to live C. Execution of the innocent D. Retribution is wrong i. Vengeance ii. Retribution and the innocent iii. Uniqueness of capital punishment iv. Payback not enough E. Failure to deter III. What the Bible says A. Old and New Testament B. A Christians view IV. Conclusion

INTRODUCTION
WHAT IS CAPITAL PUNISHMENT?
Capital punishment is the death sentence awarded for capital offences like crimes involving planned murder, multiple murders, repeated crimes; rape and murder etc. where in the criminal provisions consider such persons as a gross danger to the existence of the society and provide death punishment. Capital punishment, also referred to as the death penalty, is the judicially ordered execution of a prisoner as a punishment for a serious crime, often called a capital offense or a capital crime. Prisoners who have been sentenced to death are usually kept segregated from other prisoners in a special part of the prison pending their execution. In some places this segregated area is known as "Death Row." The term "capital" comes from the Latin capitalis, meaning "head." Thus, capital punishment is the penalty for a crime so severe that it deserves decapitation (losing one's head).

WHAT ARE THE TYPES OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT?

Rulers have always devised numerous gruesome ways to do away with prisoners: boiling them in oil, throwing them in snake pits, dragging them under boats, flaying them, poisoning them, burying them alive, drawing and quartering them, and on and on. But today, governments tend to be more civilized in the way they deal out death against their own people. The eight execution methods discussed here are those most widely practiced in an official capacity in the modern world. But it's worth mentioning that governments have been known to kill prisoners through other, less "official" means--ranging from gunshots to chemical weapons to starvation.

Lethal Injection
Lethal injection is the practice of injecting a person with a fatal dose of drugs (typically a barbiturate, paralytic, and potassium solution) for the express purpose of causing the immediate death of the subject. The main application for this procedure is capital punishment, but the term may also be applied in a broad sense to euthanasia and suicide. It kills the person by first putting the person to sleep, then stopping the breathing and heart in that order.

Gas chamber
A gas chamber is an apparatus for killing humans or animals with gas, consisting of a sealed chamber into which a poisonous orasphyxiant gas is introduced. The most commonly used poisonous agent is hydrogen cyanide; carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide have also been used. Gas chambers were used as a method of execution for condemned prisoners in the United States beginning in the 1920s.

Gas chambers have also been used for animal euthanasia, using carbon monoxide as the lethal agent. Sometimes a box filled with anaesthetic gas is used to anaesthetize small animals for surgery or euthanasia.

Electric Chair
Execution by electrocution is an execution method originating in the United States in which the person being killed is strapped to a specially built wooden chair and electrocuted through electrodes placed on the body. This execution method has been used only in the United States and, for a period of several decades, in the Philippines. The electric chair has become a symbol of the death penalty; however, its use is in decline. Historically, once the condemned person was attached to the chair, various cycles of alternating current would be passed through the condemned's body, in order to fatally damage the internal organs. The first jolt of electric current was designed to cause immediate unconsciousness and brain death; the second one was designed to cause fatal damage to the vital organs. Death was frequently caused by electrical overstimulation of the heart.

Firing Squad
Execution by firing squad, sometimes called fusilading is a method of capital punishment, particularly common in the military and in times of war. Execution by shooting is a fairly old practice. Some reasons for its use are that firearms are usually readily available and a gunshot to a vital organ usually kills the prisoner relatively quickly. Before the introduction of firearms, bows or crossbows were often used Saint Sebastian is usually depicted as executed by a squad of Roman auxiliary archers.

Hanging
Hanging is the lethal suspension of a person by a ligature. Specifically, it is putting to death by suspension by the neck, although it formerly also referred to crucifixion and death by impalement in which the body would remain hanging.

Stoning
Stoning, or lapidation, is a form of capital punishment whereby a group throws stones at a person until the person dies. No individual among the group can be identified as the one who kills the subject. This is in contrast to the case of a judicial executioner. Stoning is slower than other forms of execution, and hence is a form of execution by torture.

Beheading
It is the separation of the head from the body. Beheading typically refers to the act of intentional decapitation, e.g., as a means of murder or execution; it may be accomplished, for example, with an axe, sword, knife, wire, or by means of a guillotine. Ritualistic decapitation after execution by some other means,

sometimes followed by public display of the severed head, has also been common throughout history. An executioner carrying out decapitations is called a headsman.

Crucifixion
Crucifixion is an ancient method of painful execution in which the condemned person is tied or nailed to a large wooden cross and left to hang until dead. Crucifixion was often performed to terrorize and dissuade the onlookers from perpetrating the crimes punishable by it. Victims were left on display after death as warnings. Crucifixion was usually intended to provide a death that was particularly slow, painful, gruesome, humiliating, and public, using whatever means were most expedient for that goal. Crucifixion methods varied considerably with location and time period.

IDEAS CONTRARY TO CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

VALUE OF HUMAN LIFE
Everyone thinks human life is valuable. Some of those against capital punishment believe that human life is so valuable that even the worst murderers should not be deprived of the value of their lives. They believe that the value of the offender's life cannot be destroyed by the offender's bad conduct - even if they have killed someone. Some abolitionists don't go that far. They say that life should be preserved unless there is a very good reason not to, and that those who are in favor of capital punishment are the ones who have to justify their position.

RIGHT TO LIVE
Everyone has an inalienable human right to life, even those who commit murder; sentencing a person to death and executing them violates that right. This is very similar to the 'value of life' argument, but approached from the perspective of human rights. The counter-argument is that a person can, by their actions, forfeit human rights, and that murderers forfeit their right to life. Another example will make this clear - a person forfeits their right to life if they start a murderous attack and the only way the victim can save their own life is by killing the attacker. The medieval philosopher and theologian Thomas Aquinas made this point very clearly:

Therefore if any man is dangerous to the community and is subverting it by some sin, the treatment to be commended is his execution in order to preserve the common good... Therefore to kill a man who retains his natural worthiness is intrinsically evil, although it may be justifiable to kill a sinner just as it is to kill a beast, for, as Aristotle points out, an evil man is worse than a beast and more harmful. -Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae

Saint Thomas Aquinas is saying that certain contexts change a bad act (killing) into a good act (killing to repair the violation of justice done by the person killed, and killing a person who has forfeited their natural worthiness by killing).

EXECUTION OF THE INNOCENT

The most common and most cogent argument against capital punishment is that sooner or later, innocent people will get killed, because of mistakes or flaws in the justice system. Witnesses, prosecutors and jurors can all make mistakes. When this is coupled with flaws in the system it is inevitable that innocent people will be convicted of crimes. Where capital punishment is used such mistakes cannot be put right. There is ample evidence that such mistakes are possible in some countries, about 120 people sentenced to death have been found innocent since 1973 and released from death row. The average time on death row before these exonerations was 9 years. Things were made worse in the country when the Supreme Court refused to hold explicitly that the execution of a defendant in the face of significant evidence of innocence would be unconstitutional. However many US lawyers believe that in practice the court would not permit an execution in a case demonstrating persuasive evidence of "actual innocence". The continuous threat of execution makes the ordeal of those wrongly convicted particularly horrible.

RETRIBUTION IS WRONG
Many people believe that retribution is morally flawed and problematic in concept and practice.

Vengeance
The main argument that retribution is immoral is that it is just a sanitized form of vengeance. Scenes of howling mobs attacking prison vans containing those accused of murder on their way to and from court, or chanting aggressively outside prisons when an offender is being executed, suggest that vengeance remains a major ingredient in the public popularity of capital punishment. But just retribution, designed to re-establish distinguished from vengeance and vindictiveness. justice, can easily be

Retribution and the innocent

But the issue of the execution of innocent persons is also a problem for the retribution argument - if there is a serious risk of executing the innocent then one of the key principles of retribution - that people should get what they deserve - is

violated by the current implementation of capital punishment in any other country where errors have taken place.

Uniqueness of capital punishment

It's argued that retribution is used in a unique way in the case of the death penalty. Crimes other than murder do not receive a punishment that mimics the crime - for example rapists are not punished by sexual assault, and people guilty of assault are not ceremonially beaten up. Camus and Dostoevsky argued that the retribution in the case of the death penalty was not fair, because the anticipatory suffering of the criminal before execution would probably outweigh the anticipatory suffering of the victim of their crime. Others argue that the retribution argument is flawed because the death penalty delivers a 'double punishment'; that of the execution and the preceding wait, and this is a mismatch to the crime. Many offenders are kept 'waiting' on death row for a very long time; in USA the average wait is 10 years.

Payback not enough

Some people who believe in the notion of retribution are against capital punishment because they feel the death penalty provides insufficient retribution. They argue that life imprisonment without possibility of parole causes much more suffering to the offender than a painless death after a short period of imprisonment. Another example is the planner of a suicide bombing - execution might make that person a martyr, and therefore would be a lesser retribution than life imprisonment.

FAILURE TO DETER
The death penalty doesn't seem to deter people from committing serious violent crimes. The thing that deters is the likelihood of being caught and punished. The general consensus among social scientists is that the deterrent effect of the death penalty is at best unproven. It's actually impossible to test the deterrent effect of a punishment in a rigorous way, as to do so would require knowing how many murders would have been committed in a particular state if the law had been different during the same time period. Even if capital punishment did act as a deterrent, is it acceptable for someone to pay for the predicted future crimes of others? Some people argue that one may as well punish innocent people; it will have the same effect. This isn't true - if people are randomly picked up off the street and punished as scapegoats the only consequence is likely to be that the public will be frightened to go out. To make a scapegoat scheme effective it would be necessary to go through the

appearance of a legitimate legal process and to present evidence which convinced the public that the person being punished deserved their punishment. While some societies have operated their legal systems on the basis of fictional evidence and confessions extracted by torture, the ethical objections to such a system are sufficient to render the argument in the second paragraph pointless.

WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS

OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT
The Old Testament law commanded the death penalty for various acts: murder (Exodus 21:12), kidnapping (Exodus 21:16), bestiality (Exodus 22:19), adultery (Leviticus 20:10), homosexuality (Leviticus 20:13), being a false prophet (Deuteronomy 13:5), prostitution and rape (Deuteronomy 22:24), and several other crimes. However, God often showed mercy when the death penalty was due. David committed adultery and murder, yet God did not demand his life be taken (2 Samuel 11:1-5, 14-17; 2 Samuel 12:13). Ultimately, every sin we commit should result in the death penalty because the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23). Thankfully, God demonstrates His love for us in not condemning us (Romans 5:8). When the Pharisees brought a woman who was caught in the act of adultery to Jesus and asked Him if she should be stoned, Jesus replied, If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her (John 8:7). This should not be used to indicate that Jesus rejected capital punishment in all instances. Jesus was simply exposing the hypocrisy of the Pharisees. The Pharisees wanted to trick Jesus into breaking the Old Testament law; they did not truly care about the woman being stoned (where was the man who was caught in adultery?) God is the One who instituted capital punishment: Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed, for in the image of God He made man (Genesis 9:6). Jesus would support capital punishment in some instances. Jesus also demonstrated grace when capital punishment was due (John 8:1-11). The apostle Paul definitely recognized the power of the government to institute capital punishment where appropriate (Romans 13:1-7).

A CHRISTIANS VIEW
How should a Christian view the death penalty? First, we must remember that God has instituted capital punishment in His Word; therefore, it would be presumptuous of us to think that we could institute a higher standard. God has the highest standard of any being; He is perfect. This standard applies not only to us but to Him. Therefore, He loves to an infinite degree, and He has mercy to an infinite degree. We also see that He has wrath to an infinite degree, and it is all maintained in a perfect balance. Second, we must recognize that God has given government the authority to determine when capital punishment is due (Genesis 9:6; Romans 13:1-7). It is unbiblical to claim that God opposes the death penalty in all instances. Christians should never rejoice when the death penalty is employed, but at the same time,

Christians should not fight against the governments right to execute the perpetrators of the most evil of crimes.

CONCLUSION
Capital punishment, through the "sword" of governing authority, is one of Gods means of punishing evil-doers. As Christians, we must submit to the authority of government, which is given the power of such punishment. Personal vengeance must be avoided. Early opponents of capital punishment also argued that inflicting death was not necessary to control crime and properly punish wrongdoers. Instead, alternative punishmentsuch as imprisonmentcould effectively isolate criminals from the community, deter other potential offenders from committing offenses, and express the community's condemnation of those who break its laws. Supporters of capital punishment countered that the ultimate penalty of death was necessary for the punishment of terrible crimes because it provided the most complete retribution and condemnation. Furthermore, they argued that the threat of execution was a unique deterrent. Death penalty supporters contended that capital punishment self-evidently prevents more crime because death is so much more feared than mere restrictions on ones liberty. The allegations of brutality inspired two different responses by those who supported executions. First, advocates contended that capital punishment was necessary for the safety of other citizens and therefore not gratuitous. Second, death penalty supporters sought to remove some of the most visibly gruesome aspects of execution. Executions that had been open to the public were relocated behind closed doors. Later, governments replaced traditional methods of causing deathsuch as hangingwith what were regarded as more modern methods, such as electrocution and poison gas. The human rights focus on the death penalty has continued, especially in settings of dramatic political change. When people view capital punishment as a human rights issue, countries that are becoming more democratic have been eager to abolish the death penalty, which they associate with the former regime and its abuses of power. For example, a number of Eastern European nations abolished capital punishment shortly after the collapse of communist regimes there in 1989. Similarly, the multiracial government of South Africa formed in 1994 quickly outlawed a death penalty many associated with apartheid, the official policy of racial segregation that had been in place since the late 1940s. In the debate about execution and human dignity, supporters and opponents of the death penalty have found very little common ground. Opponents of capital punishment assert that it is degrading to the humanity of the person punished. Since the 18th century, those who wish to abolish the death penalty have stressed

the significance of requiring governments to recognize the importance of each individual. However, supporters of capital punishment see nothing wrong with governments deliberately killing terrible people who commit terrible crimes. Therefore, they see no need to limit governmental power in this area. Let us strive to live within the boundaries of that which God has authorized. Let us support that which God supports, and renounce that which God calls evil. And let us pray for those who are in positions of authority so that they will rule wisely, and, above all, consistently with the will of God (1 Timothy 2:1-2). In this way, we can lead tranquil and quiet lives in all godliness and dignity.

But when the kindness and love of God our Saviour appeared, He saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Saviour, so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life. -Titus 3:4-7

REFERENCES

Babbage, S. B. (2003). C. S. Lewis and the Humanitarian Theory of Punishment, The Christian Lawyer. Bork, R. H. (April 29, 1992). An Outbreak of Judicial Civil Disobedience, Wall Street Journal, A22. Clinton, W. F. (June 25, 1990). The War against Capital

Punishment, National Review. Duggan, A. (December 18, 1993). Witness Imprisoned by Fear; Man Goes to Jail Rather than Risk Testifying at Murder Trial, The Washington Post, 18 December 1993, A1. Kaiser, W. (2005). Toward Old Testament Ethics, 167. Remmington, Z. (May 1993). New World, New Disorder, Crisis, 40. Seper, J. (December 1993). System Fails to Stop Repeat Offenders, The Washington Times, A7. York, M. (June 4, 1992). James Found Guilty of Freeway

Murder, Washington Post, B1.