Liberals and the Death Penalty

[BayCityProgressive]

Hello everyone,

As a liberal I feel that the DP is morally wrong. Many states have been placing moratoriums on the DP as of late and there is a chance that in my home state of Michigan the DP may be brought back by ballot initiative (blood crazy conservatives cheering it on of course). Fortunately we have a great fairly liberal governor, gov. granholm, and she opposes the DP. the problem I have is this: How can I tell people that a woman's right to choose shouldnt be restricted because some find it morally objectionable; then turn around and say the DP should be illegal because it is morally wrong. We liberals are trying to write our morals into law just as the conservatives it seems. I know some people have been put to death and then found innocent which is horrible, but if there was mandatory DNA testing, the chance for appeals, and children and the mentally disabled are not given the DP........then what is our reason for banning it? This is not flame bait I really want to have some good arguments to use against conservatives because I think it will be a huge focus in the coming elections.

[crispini]

1. Here's my take on it.

The real question about abortion which people don't seem to get at is, When does a fetus become a human being? When does it graduate from the potential of life to "life?" Various religious give us different answers to this question. Some even say "at birth," others say at quickening when the mother feels the baby move -- I think this is some time in the 2nd trimester, although I could be wrong. So Roe v. Wade was set up to have abortion easily available during 1st trimester, not so easy during 2nd, and more difficult during 3rd.

Now, contrast this-- many different opinions about "is the fetus alive?" vs. the DP where the person is VERY OBVIOUSLY alive and you get a better insight. Although it is a similar situation I really don't think the DP and abortion are all that parallel. JMO....

[Pushed To The Left]

2. Two words: Wrongful convictions!

This is what finally changed my opinion on capital punishment after years of strongly supporting it. The more I saw about wrongful convictions, the less practical I felt the death penalty was. I have no sympathy for violent criminals, but our justice system is far from perfect, and mistakes happen. I would rather let guilty people spend life in prison than execute an innocent person. If somebody is wrongfully ocnvicted and gets life in prison, that person can be let out. If an innocent person is executed, than the mistake can not be corrected.

[Mythsaje]

3. You can't apologize to the dead

if you make a mistake. They won't hear you.

My primary reason for opposing the death penalty is that I don't believe government is qualified to decide who lives or dies. I'm not sure any human being, or collection of human beings, is so qualified. Justice is not equal for all Americans and as long as it isn't, as long as the prosecution has resources not available to the average American who ISN'T O.J. Simpson or Michael Jackson, the government has no business using its overwhelming advantage to win court cases against those who cannot fight back.

They have no right to take even a single innocent life in my name. Ever. And, until such time that there is NO question whether someone accused of a capital crime is guilty or not, I'd prefer they refrain from killing people.

In simple terms...if Conservatives don't trust government to handle so many other things, why in the hell should they trust government to decide the fate of those accused of capital crimes?

[Canuckistanian]

4. We banned it in our country because:

1. It's not a real deterrent.

2. The chance of executing someone mistakenly is not worth the risk

3. It only appeases those who want revenge, not justice.

4. It's a barbaric act of violence against another human being and not considered civilised, as it is in most of the developed world.

Just some of the arguments I've heard (and believe in myself)

[carolinalady]

5. Personally. I could never give someone the death penalty

because I believe their appointed death date is between them and God.

[Warren Stupidity]

6. DNA testing can prove innocence but it cannot prove guilt.

It can falsify or support an assertion of fact, it can't prove absolutely that the accused is the perpetrator. So we are still left with the possibility of an irredeemable mistake: a wrongful conviction that cannot be undone because the convict has been executed.

I don't oppose the death penalty solely on the basis of the possibility of an irredeemable mistake. If there existed a device which could ascertain with absolute certainty "who did it" I would still oppose the death penalty. I find it morally unjustified to knowingly take the life of a person. I find a just exception only in immediate self defense. In addition I strongly believe that granting the state the authority to kill us is a dreadful error.

[Crunchy Frog]

7. Use practical arguments rather than moral ones.

It doesn't deter crime, it's impossible to apply fairly when people differ in their access to legal resources, it's irreversible if a mistake is made, it's actually more costly than keeping someone imprisoned for life. You could also make the argument that you are morally opposed to abortion as well, but don't think it can be made illegal for practical reasons: it has not been shown that making abortion illegal actually lowers the rate, simply makes women much more likely to be injured or killed from it; abortion rates are more effectively lowered by improving the social safety net and access to contraception.

I agree with you that trying to argue for a law being passed simply because it's "moral" is a losing proposition. I do think it's possible to make a principled and consistent arguement for ending the death penalty and for keeping abortion legal.

[IrishBloodEngHeart]

8. there are lots of problems besides that....

why do minorities receive the death penalty as a sentance more?

why do the poor receive the death penalty as a sentence more?

why do the uneducated receive it more?

Until the death penalty has 100% certainty as relates to guilt and is 100% equally distrubuted without regard to race, class, education level, geography, education, age or religion, it is immoral,

I would be against anyway, simply because it doesn't accomplish anything, and spending the money it takes to make sure it is accurately done could be better spent on other things.

[mrcheerful]

9. Don't know where you got your information, but I suggest you read

the michigan constitution. Michigan never had the DP in its entire history as a state. Can't bring back something that never was.

[ellenfl]

10. as previously stated, abortion as murder

is predicated on the belief that the fetus is a viable human being. our government doesn't consider an in utero cluster of cells to be a human being. if it did, pregnant women should get to deduct the fetus as a dependent on their income tax.

at least, that's the way i see the hypocrisy.

as for the dp, it's better to let a million guilty men live than to kill one innocent man . . . and many innocent men have been put to death.

while we are on the subject, why do we continue to execute people who have shown rehabilitation? like carla tucker.

ellen fl

[Nutmegger]

11. Pro-choice NOT pro-abortion

I am rabidly against the DP. It does nothing and sends a wrong signal to the kids / world.

As far as abortion is concerned, I don't think people are really "pro-abortion". It's all about the choice and respecting that woman's right to do so. I think abortion is terrible but would never, ever want to intrude on a woman's right to choose.

[mvd]

12. The fetus is still part of the mother's body

So therefore, it should be the mother's choice whether or not to have an abortion. After birth is where we care more than the conservatives about life.

[Lorien]

13. Well, for starters, states with the DP have higher rates of violent crime

especially homicide. In fact, if a state enacts a death penalty, homicide rates jump up, when the DP is eliminated from a state, they go down. This has been true for decades; I studied in in college psychology classes (psychologists still aren't certain why the phenomenon occurs-so think it's due to a "death wish" in some disturbed individuals). The other question psychologists must ask state governments is, if the crime rate jumps when there's a DP, why keep the DP? The answer is that the DP makes people feel good-they like the thought of revenge. So it's simply not logical to impose a death penalty-it's really only a political tool used to appeal to voter's emotions.

Sorry I don't have a link, but last time I posted about this several people provided them for me. Hopefully those good souls are around tonight.

[freethought]

14. My two cents.

If probably echoes previous posters by I will give my opinion on death penalty.
Someone could argue that there are those criminals that deserve to die for their crimes and they could be arguably correct. Ted Bundy, Henry Lee Lucas, Richard Allen Davis, Timothy McVeigh, and Otis Toole. These men committed crimes so vile they are not deserving of forgiveness. I might have a hard time trying to convince a pro-DP individual to keep Richard Allen Davis alive on moral grounds. They could simply come back at me and say "He raped and murdered a little girl, he does not deserve that moral benefit." Could be hard to rationalize that one down.

My main concern with the death penalty is that it represents true danger when justice and politics become mixed. When the two come together especially in those cases that are emotionally or politically charged, nobody is safe. It is in such situations that the an innocent can be wrongly convicted and sentenced to die. Prosecutors and investigators may take shortcuts or do such things that they may not usually do when certain political pressures are applied. Emotions run high and rational thought is low. The execution of of one innocent is not justified by the execution of 99 guilty. I do not accept an argument that it's somehow OK to have a death penalty even if 1% or 2% of the executed may have been innocent.

Richard Allen Davis may get what he deserves, but I cannot argue in favor of DP when fabricated evidence or false testimony puts an innocent in the chamber. There is no way to 'unexecute' a person who has been executed and later found to be innocent.