The Instigator
BrownIsBest
Con (against)
Losing
5 Points
The Contender
theisticscuffles
Pro (for)
Winning
27 Points

Death Penalty- (Brief, Quick, Debate)

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 6 votes the winner is...
theisticscuffles
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/15/2015 Category: Economics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 767 times Debate No: 75361
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (6)

 

BrownIsBest

Con

Death is truly an unusually severe punishment. Unusual in it's pain, unusual in it's suffering, it's finality, and it's enormity. Because of the nature of the death penalty, it treats those humans who are on death row as non humans toyed with and discarded. No matter what the crime, death should never be the choice. If anything, the worse punishment should be a life sentence. Rather than death, we should implement rehabilitation programs such as those seen in today's society, e.g. Homeboy Industries. Programs such as Homeboy Industries should be promoted more as well so that those who live in a life of crime or violence can seek help, shelter, and ultimately, a step in the right direction in their life. By doing this, we will reduce cost of imprisonment, promote a healthier environment in society, and lower part of the crime in many places today.
theisticscuffles

Pro

Capital punishment is a necessary evil. It is part of retribution so that society has an ordered sense of justice. It is used as a last resort. It is a form of deterrence.

When it is determined that many wrongful convictions have occurred which have placed innocent people on "Death Row," the governor [or other lawful authority] can and should declare a moratorium on the death penalty until all current death row inmates awaiting execution would have further opportunity to review their cases and figure out ways to speed up DNA crime analysis to confirm or disconfirm guilt.

My opponent argues about all of this suffering and pain for the death penalty. But the death penalty is quick compared to a lifetime rotting in prison. Rehabilitation programs may or may not work and may put rapists and serial killers right back out on the street.

Here's some testimony about the devastating murders committed by John Wayne Gacy. [1] It was best for him.

[1] http://www.prairieghosts.com...
Debate Round No. 1
BrownIsBest

Con

BrownIsBest forfeited this round.
theisticscuffles

Pro

The death penalty should never be used except in cases of premeditated, conscious murder and never self-defense leading to accidental homicide.

One of the primary reasons for the death penalty is a just society where one person who takes another person's life has serious consequences. Blood for blood, so to speak. In Genesis chapter 9, after Noah has been discharged from the ark, God issues instructions for civil and just societies to be conducted. There are punishments for taking the life of humans and animals which includes the execution of criminals who take other people's lives.

Why do you believe that the death penalty is so severe? Many people who have committed homocides have asked for the death penalty.

Also, why is it severe in pain and suffering? What if the state can find a very quick way to execute lifelong criminals who have resisted every method of rehabilitation? Won't that cause less pain and suffering to the victims of the criminal?
Debate Round No. 2
BrownIsBest

Con

BrownIsBest forfeited this round.
theisticscuffles

Pro

"For your own lifeblood I will surely require a reckoning: from every animal I will require it and from human beings, each one for the blood of another, I will require a reckoning for human life. Whoever sheds the blood of a human, by a human shall that person's blood be shed; for in his image God made humankind." [1]

The taking of another person's life is not to be flippant or a trivial thing; justice whereby the perpetrator receives a similar punishment to the crime committed ensures that life and spilling blood are serious matters.

If you take someone else's life with malice, you may justly and morally lose your own life.

[1] Genesis, chapter 9, verses five and six, New Revised Standard Version, 1989.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by theisticscuffles 2 years ago
theisticscuffles
Thanks for the opportunity.
Posted by BrownIsBest 2 years ago
BrownIsBest
Hi theisticscuffles! Thank you for responding to my debate. I enjoyed the speedy pace of the debate as well as I watched from the distance..... quietly. I apologize for not responding, I just didn't know what else to say. Your points were strong and there wasn't much to say about it. Thank you though for participating.
Posted by theisticscuffles 2 years ago
theisticscuffles
I did enjoy the speedy pace of this debate, even though it was a little rushed.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by Sourec 2 years ago
Sourec
BrownIsBesttheisticscufflesTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:24 
Reasons for voting decision: Sorry, just an awful debate, especially because of the forfeiting. Pro, you actually made some decent arguments compared to Con, who didn't have any rebuttals whatsoever. As for sources... ugh. Con had no sources, but Pro... as far as I'm concerned, your sources were so awful they contribute to negative source points. A site about ghosts (classic black background and everything, woohoo...) is not really that great of a source, and neither in the Bible any kind of valid source at all.
Vote Placed by Midnight1131 2 years ago
Midnight1131
BrownIsBesttheisticscufflesTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: FF, so conduct to Pro. Con made an initial argument, but this was later refuted by Pro. Pro then continued to make their own arguments, but these were never refuted, because Pro forfeited the rest of the debate. Pro was the only one to use sources.
Vote Placed by tajshar2k 2 years ago
tajshar2k
BrownIsBesttheisticscufflesTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Cowboy0108 2 years ago
Cowboy0108
BrownIsBesttheisticscufflesTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: fft
Vote Placed by TBSmothers 2 years ago
TBSmothers
BrownIsBesttheisticscufflesTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by Stefy 2 years ago
Stefy
BrownIsBesttheisticscufflesTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: Even though con forfeited they still had better arguments than pro which is kind of astounding. Pro actually argued a concrete reason and gave an alternative for the abolishment of the death penalty. Con just explained why its not that severe. Also even though con didnt cite a source pro only cited the Bible which has no bearing on national or state law. Pro didnt say mich in threee rounds he mostly just quoted the Bible without analysis whereas con got an actual argument out in one round.