Moral Debate Over Capital Punishment

A detailed Summary of Moral Debate Over Capital Punishment

The idea of capital punishment has been debated as long as it has been around. Forms of capital punishment have been enforced since ancient times in most societies. Death has been used as punishment for crimes ranging in gravity from petty theft to murder. Modern opposition to capital punishment arose in France in the eighteenth century and spread through out Western Europe, where most nations abolished such laws in the twentieth century. In the United States the death penalty was applied with decreasing frequency after World War II, and in 1972 the U.S. Supreme Court voided all federal and state laws calling for the death penalty on the grounds that condemned persons were being subjected to cruel and unusual punishment. Cruel and unusual punishment is in violation of the 8th amendment to the Constitution. The court left open, however, the possibility of new, constitutional laws, and since then the U.S. and most states have enacted measures imposing the penalty in specified kinds of murder cases. As of today all but eleven states enforce some kind of death penalty.

The question of whether or not the death penalty should be legal is large dividing line between conservatives and liberals. The conservatives tend to support the ide

After analyzing the way Lakoff's moral models handle the death penalty, it is apparent that the models are lacking value when it comes to studying moral politics. In the case of capital punishment both models seem to be against the idea. The only way to truly look at the issue is to pull away from the Nation as a Family metaphor and look at the ideals that are at the heart of conservatism and liberalism. These values are simply that conservatives are more focused on giving out strict justice for the crimes of people, and liberals want to help reform people. In the mind of the conservative who supports the death penalty, the murder did a grave injustice to society and must pay. Also hopefully others will see the consequences that could occur and curve their evil ways. The liberal who fights the death penalty sees a person who has done wrong do to the circumstances he has lived in and with the right environment can either be transformed into a decent person or at least be kept alive in prison. Lakoff's models are a good starting point for looking at moral politics, but there must be more examining of the conservative and liberal position for each individual moral issue.

Lakoff starts by stating "Nurturant Parent morality militates against the death penalty" (Lakoff 1996, p.208). He explains this claim by telling how the death penalty is not equal due to the fact that the courts can not guarantee that the penalty is applied fairly. The idea of inequality is a direct violation of the

Some common words found in the essay are:
Nurturant Parent, Nation Family, Supreme Court, , death penalty, Western Europe, Justice Statistics, Strict Father, nurturant parent, lakoff 1996, capital punishment, George Lakoff, moral politics, parent morality, nurturant parent morality, penalty applied, 1996 p208, War II, lakoff 1996 p208, strict father morality, father morality, nurturant parent government, unusual punishment, lakoff 1996 209,

Approximate Word count = 1007
Approximate Pages = 4 (250 words per page double spaced)

Category: Politics