Reading Notes for Capital Punishment PDF

Preview

Summary

reading notes...

Description

The Morality of Capital Punishment, Walter Berns I. Anger—according to Berns, the emotion you express when someone has acted in a way you think is unjust, and you think they should be held accountable. II. Moral community—community whose members trust one another to obey the laws. Additional notes • Berns argues that in punishing criminals society shows them the respect they are owed as human beings. • According to Berns, anger is the right response to a terrible criminal act. • Berns thinks we can become angry and stay angry with human beings, except for those who are insane and not responsible for their actions. • By a “moral community,” Berns means members of the community trust one another to obey the laws. • Berns thinks that the anger we feel at criminals is important because criminals hurt the whole community, not just the victim, and our anger is a sign of how much we care for that community. • Berns argues that anger may be accompanied by pleasure. • Berns does not expect the law-abiding person to feel unhappy when a criminal is punished. • Berns believes that to be angry with someone is to acknowledge their human dignity and moral responsibility. • Berns does not argue that our anger at criminals is a selfish and mean calculation. • Berns is in favor of capital punishment because, by punishing criminals appropriately, we are holding them responsible for their actions and paying them the respect due them as human beings; in addition to capital punishment is a fitting expression of our communal care for victims and our anger at the perpetrators of injustice. The Death Penalty as a Symbolic Issue, Stephen Nathanson I. Desert—What a person deserves. Spelled like “desert”—the climate where it doesn't rain much—but pronounced like “dessert”—the sweet course you get at the end of a meal. II. Moral monsters—people who commit extraordinary atrocities, outside the bounds of “normal” crime, such as Hitler or Stalin Additional notes • Nathanson and Berns agree that capital punishment symbolizes our values as a society. • Nathanson argues that actions performed in the name of righteous anger may or may not be morally right. • Berns argues that the death penalty encourages people to feel reverence toward criminal law; however Nathanson’s objections to this point are that killing is not necessary to encourage reverence and encouraging reverence toward the law might be unwise if the law is unjust. • The symbolic messages Nathanson believes we would convey, if we abolished the death penalty is that all human lives deserve respect, regardless of what they have done. • The second message that Nathanson sees in abolishing the death penalty is violence is only acceptable in selfdefense. • Nathanson uses the example of the automobile accident to show that feeling angry at someone doesn't prove you are justified in killing them. • Nathanson does not believes that the law always deserves complete reverence and respect. • According to Nathanson, by abolishing the death penalty, we express our respect for human dignity....