Why does the US and so many of its citizens continue to support the death penalty?

[Ender]

I’m veering off-topic, but note that neither of those words means justice, which should be the ultimate goal in how we respond to crime.

Retribution is justice, and it is the primary objective of punishment.

We speak of merit and demerit, in relation to retribution, rendered according to justice. Now, retribution according to justice is rendered to a man, by reason of his having done something to another’s advantage or hurt (Aquinas ST I-II 21,3)

 

[Rau]

And thus that which is lawful to God is lawful for His ministers when they act by His mandate. It is evident that God who is the Author of laws, has every right to inflict death on account of sin. For “the wages of sin is death.” Neither does His minister sin in inflicting that punishment. (Catechism of St Thomas)

Of course, it would be sinful to act in the knowledge (or belief) that said action does more harm than good.

 

[Ender]

Of course, it would be sinful to act in the knowledge (or belief) that said action does more harm than good.

I don’t know why this keeps coming up. Of course it’s true, and no one disputes it, but if you believe it will be harmful and I believe it will be beneficial we must both act according to our beliefs, and if we do so no one sins even though one of us will likely be mistaken.

Supporting capital punishment is a sin only if one believes its consequences will be harmful, which is true of literally everything: we may not do something we think is bad, but my support of capital punishment is not sinful because you (or anyone else) think it is bad.

 

[Mrchatsworth]

Perhaps you could learn more about evil people. I cannot comprehend that you really think people cannot be evil and reconcile that with any type of Christianity.

 

[Rau]

I don’t know why this keeps coming up.

It comes up because it keeps being forgotten by several, including those who seem to think there is such a thing as “intrinsically good” acts, and that CP might be one of them. And by people who think the church has reversed a teaching.

 

[Annie]

From the article I linked above

Society is justly ordered when each person receives what is due to him. Crime disturbs this just order, for the criminal takes from people their lives, peace, liberties, and worldly goods in order to give himself undeserved benefits. Deserved punishment protects society morally by restoring this just order, making the wrongdoer pay a price equivalent to the harm he has done. This is retribution, not to be confused with revenge, which is guided by a different motive. In retribution the spur is the virtue of indignation, which answers injury with injury for public good. In revenge the spur is the passion of resentment, which answers malice with malice for private satisfaction.

It is in this sense I use the word retribution.

 

[do_justly_love_mercy]

Is the rate of violent crime peculiarly high in the US that people feel it [death penalty] is needed?

Certainly the rate of violent crime is high compared with other comparably developed countries. There does not appear to be any persuasive evidence, however, that the death penalty is effective in reducing the rate of violent crime. Statistics have routinely shown that Poland and Japan have the lowest rates of violent crime in the world. Poland abolished the death penalty soon after the end of the communist regime, whereas Japan uses the death penalty with some frequency and with overwhelming public support.

The intentional homicide rate in Greenland is fractionally higher than in the US (although its tiny population perhaps makes this statistically insignificant), but Greenland continues to have one of the most progressive prison systems in the world (prisoners, including murderers, are allowed out in the community during the day and spend only nine hours overnight in their cells, to which they have the keys). And it works: the reoffending rate is less than 1%. If Greenland seems to tiny a country to use as a useful comparison, consider Argentina. Its intentional homicide rate is very nearly as high as that in the US, but it has not held an execution since 1956, having originally abolished the death penalty in 1853 (only to reintroduce it on and off over the course of the 20th century).

It is therefore hard to see much in the way of a causal relationship between the rate of violent crime and the kind of penal system considered necessary to address it. There are countries that do not resort to the death penalty despite extraordinarily high rates of violent crime (e.g. El Salvador), there are countries that do use it, despite an extremely low rate of violent crime (e.g. Japan), there are countries that maintain an extremely low crime rate despite not imposing harsh sentences (e.g. Poland), and then there are countries, such as the United States, that impose extremely harsh sentences, including death, and also have a high rate of violent crime.

 

[Beryllos]

I cannot comprehend that you really think people cannot be evil and reconcile that with any type of Christianity.

On the contrary, to see the good in every person is a very Christian attitude.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

Many Americans seem to have an almost religious sense of the necessity of a blood sacrifice to atone for guilt, whereas Canadians, Europeans, etc. seem to be content with imprisonment.

You have just summed up precisely why many Americans support the death penalty.

In many ways, the United States views itself as “the one true country”, and in the eyes of many, our way is the only way, and nobody else’s country or way of life is even worth considering. To this stripe of American, we are the country the rest of the world wants to be like, the rest of the world wants to come to, and everything and everyone just has to defer to us, if they’ve got any sense at all. Americans see no point in learning anyone else’s language, and if they do travel overseas — most do not — it is as “tourists”, to go and gawk, and for many, to travel in groups with other Americans, to treat the rest of the world as a kind of theme park, go, see it, and come back home. “Over there” is dangerous in their eyes, and is best left alone.

These are gross stereotypes, but a substantial percentage of the American population thinks exactly like this — whether they realize it or not.

 

[Mrchatsworth]

Every person is created good. If one were Christian and didn’t believe people could be evil and accepted the doctrine of hell as an eternal place of punishment, then that would make God a horrible person for even having that option for His creation. To deny the evil of man is to deny the very purpose of Christ and the basics of being a Christian.

 

[Beryllos]

Sorry, I’m not getting that last sentence.

 

[do_justly_love_mercy]

It’s about resolution for the family of the victim(s), not about what is good for society as a whole.

I find the idea that the death of the perpetrator brings resolution to the family of the victim a strange one. For it to work, I think one has to start from the premise that the family of the victim wants the perpetrator to be executed. If a member of my family were to be murdered, I think that knowing that the perpetrator was going to be executed would be the last thing that I would want. There are plenty of examples of victims’ families who oppose the death penalty:

Loading…

deathpenaltyinfo.org

Loading…

www.americamagazine.org

Also, punishment is not supposed to be about making victims and their families feel better. If that is a consequence of the punishment given, that is a good thing, but punishment is supposed to be done by the state on behalf of all of society. Our system is not one based on personal revenge. There are countries, especially in the Muslim world, where victims have a decisive say in the punishment awarded, but those systems are never ones that we would wish to emulate in the western world.

“The rest of the world is doing it” is never an excuse to do something or we’d never have been one of first countries to outlaw slavery. Pro slavery people would have been using your argument to keep slavery legal

First, it is a stretch to claim that we were one of the first countries in the world to abolish slavery. You would need, of course, to define what you mean by slavery and to compare the United States with other western societies. Secondly, I would see the abolition of the death penalty as something positive that the rest of the world is achieving before us, just as I would see the abolition of slavery as something positive that large areas of the world (notably the British Empire) achieved before us. When all of the most developed western nations in the world have abolished the death penalty, some as far back as the 19th century, we must wonder why the United States has not yet joined them. For example 13 countries in Europe and 10 countries in Latin America carried out their last executions before 1950. In the United States we are still carrying out executions in the 2020s.

 

[JimG]

The state of Illinois has no death penalty. Yet the death penalty can be randomly imposed on persons in the streets of Chicago with no warning or recourse. I would like to see those death penalties stopped, as well as those in other cities and states.

 

[Beryllos]

I think you’re getting warm, drawing an equivalence between the death penalty and murder.

 

[AlNg]

Yes, just for it’s positive effect for the common good. It is not inherently just.

If the death penalty is not inherently just why did Church officials support burning people at the stake if they translated the Bible?

the Church is confirming the death penalty under the traditional teaching of the Church must be withheld if it is doing more harm than good in society.

Was translating the Bible doing a whole lot of harm?

 

[Aquinas11]

First, it is a stretch to claim that we were one of the first countries in the world to abolish slavery.

Third behind UK (1833) and France (1848) so yes one of first. Even if we were tenth that’s one of first given how many countries. UN treaty on slavery took decades after USA ban.

Secondly, I would see the abolition of the death penalty as something positive that the rest of the world is achieving before us, j

Again , “the rest of the world is doing it!” isn’t a valid argument

 

[AlNg]

Some would argue that cutting off a hand for a major theft is appropriate and not disproportional.

Didn’t Jesus say: “And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell.” Matthew 5: 30.

why you think that this should be the case in the United States when it would not be the case in comparable societies such as virtually the whole of Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the whole of Latin America, South Africa, Israel, Hong Kong, Macau, South Korea, and so on.

Because the US, being a more barbaric country, has more violent crime than most of the countries that you mentioned. Many of these violent crimes are correlated with drug trafficking and my guess from some of the American movies that I have seen and from some of what I have read is that Americans tend to promote and even glorify the use of illegal drugs.

 

[do_justly_love_mercy]

Again , “the rest of the world is doing it!” isn’t a valid argument

I originally posed it as a question, not an argument. Why has most of the rest of the world abolished the death penalty, but the US has not? That is not an argument, but a question. One could extend that question, however, to say that, since it has been established on independent grounds that the abolition of the death penalty is a good thing, its abolition around the world increases the imperative for the US to abolish it too. Furthermore, where it does become a valid argument is when one is able to use other countries around the world as useful points of comparison. Since the abolition of the death penalty has clearly been successfully implemented in virtually the whole of Europe and the British Commonwealth, as well as the whole of Latin America and many other advanced countries such as Israel and South Korea, it would be reasonable to infer that its abolition could also be successfully implemented in the US.

 

[Aquinas11]

You’re arguing whether USA was second or third country to ban slavery, which is irrelevant to point that
(1) they were one of first countries to ban
(2) “other countries are doing it!” isn’t a valid reason to adjust policy or we’d never have banned slavery

When you see that other counties around the world are successfully doing something better than your own country is doing, that provides an imperative for us to try to do better also.

That sentence word for word would have been stated by people trying to rationalize slavery and oppose abolition in USA in 1865

 

[blackforest]

Your quote wouldn’t apply because I alluded to vengeance and not revenge.

We speak of merit and demerit, in relation to retribution, rendered according to justice. Now, retribution according to justice is rendered to a man, by reason of his having done something to another’s advantage or hurt (Aquinas ST I-II 21,3)

If we are to cherry pick the teachings of Church scholars, I’ll settle with the USCCB.

You’re free to address this in another thread. But where it is off-topic to the OP’s question of why the death penalty seems to have more acceptance in the U.S. than the rest of the Western world, I’ll be muting to avoid getting sucked into an off-topic rabbit trail.