pull down to refresh
I don't believe it necessarily carries more moral weight, its more about what capabilities I am are happy with the state possessing. I don't want the state to have the power to kill me outside of a very special set of circumstances like war or immediate threat to others / law enforcement.
some crimes are horrible, and people need to be removed from society, for everyone's safety, that is not in question. but granting the power to kill that inmate 30 years later not seem to serve any Justice, to me. Everything was fine yesterday, and will be fine tomorrow. Why do we need to make those connected to the victim suffer again 30 years later by bringing it to attention.
I think you achieve the same outcome without the needing to grant the state that capability. Only 1/3 of the countries in the world have the death penalty, and 17 exercised it last year. I would prefer if none had that capability.
I used to be more against the death penalty, but as I've gotten older I've become more supportive of it in principle. How it gets implemented in practice is another question. I just don't think blanket opposition to death penalty is a workable moral principle.
The problem with blanket opposition to death penalty is that it suggests that any and all human life carries more moral weight than literally anything else. I don't think that's true. I think some crimes are so horrible that death penalty is warranted, and the demand for justice supercedes that person's right to life.