MORALITY OF THE DEATH PENALTY 2
Morality of the Death Penalty
In the contemporary world, perceptions of the moral stance of the death penalty are
profoundly diverse. Considering that morality differentiates right and wrong, it has been
challenging to conclude whether the punishment of offenders through the death penalty is
justified or not. However, after a close examination of its application and impacts, while
referring to the deductions of normative ethical relativism and moral realism, it is correct
deducing that the death penalty is morally permissible.
Morality means that one has to distinguish between right and wrong acts. Some crimes
are heinous in the sense that they affect masses adversely or claim people’s lives. A perfect
example is terrorist acts. When the death penalty applies to the crimes of high magnitude, it
serves the offenders right since they appear to be an unwanted and dangerous part of society. As
a result, it correctly acts as the best retribution process which is equal to the crime that the
offender commits. Despite some arguments that it violates the right to life, it is morally wrong to
think that people who do not respect others’ lives deserve it in any way. Overall, it promotes
fairness.
Death penalty promotes deterrence and reform. Regarding deterrence, the method
protects the innocent from harm. Doing so gives the procedure its forward-looking purpose and
shows that the punishment approach is not there to punish but to deter offenders from engaging
in heinous acts. Since morality is concerned primarily with the rightness of an action, it is right
to use a correctional approach that guarantees the safety of the majority. As the offenders see
what happens to others, they reform and continue promoting a better community morally.