The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
4 Points

Rapist should be given death penalty

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/18/2016 Category: News
Updated: 5 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 424 times Debate No: 91430
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)




"Raping has always been a heated issue among society, some people contend that rape is more dangerous than murder since it implants miserable traumatic in the entire of the victims' lives'


1. The Death Sentence is not "Just" - Under any Circumstance

A "Just Act" usually means that it is an equanimable act. On its face, "death" is not nearly as punitive as rape may warrant. On the other hand, rape is not as final as death - which precludes the possibility of any life.

Consider: What if the person didn't actually die? What if the offender just thinks they died, but the offender lives?

2. A Death Sentence for Two?

True Justice also brings life. And, death is not sufficient to bring life.

There are many possible paths for this life to happen. And if one of those paths is to ensure that the offender lives - then that possibilty for life is impossible following a death sentence.

What can bring life is to know that it will never happen again, that the offender has had a profound change of heart - incapable of doing it again, deeply remorseful.

Constraining Justice to "Equity" is an archaic, devolved, concept.

3. The Spirituality of "Death"

Perhaps religion argues that when you die - you will immediately face punishiment, even torture for your crimes.

Is it possible to weigh some "Incomprehensible Death" with any other crime, (those we can actually comprehend)?

And does such an incomprehensible punishment necessarily relieve pain we feel presently?

4. A Just Resolution:

Our society seems "stuck" trying to force victims to believe, - "It will be over, when they are dead." We lure them into a false belief, and tell them "their death will be meaningful".

But - can't their life be more meaninful?

We already know that traumatic experience isn't necessarily "resolved" from that death.

But, what IS just is for life, vitality, and wholeness, to be restored to the victim. No amount of death can ever do this - not any more than someone can quench thirst, with an empty glass.

Debate Round No. 1


Rebutals for your statements

1. Raping is a cruel and detrimental action from which the victim will experience hard time to eliminate the thought after being raped. He or she(the victim), therefore, will mentally be ill and their mind is destructed. so, he or she is just like a living corpse. compared to the effect of murder, raping has more detrimental effects, because murder only takes away one's life and after that it is done.

2. By conducting death penalty, there will no be more rapists. because they have known the consequence of raping.

3. As I mentioned earlier, rapists action is unforgivable this is the equal punishment for them because of the detrimental effects, such as being barren, suffering serious disease (HIV, AIDS for example). the victim will mentally suffer even though he or she can physically be cured.

4. What if your daughter for example is a rape victim. what is "just" punishment for the rapist?? What is just for you? I am convinced that you could say could " DEATH SENTENCE".


A. Re. #1 - Minimalizing other Crimes vs. Rape: The argument that rape of a person is different and more significant, because it leaves people as shells - and therefore justifies a death sentence, is not sound.

Is it really true that only rape leaves people "as shells" of who they were? What about other horrific crimes towards family? The abduction of children, the murder of their daughters, and sons, the exploitation of their children, the rape of their wives, the death of any loved one.

Wouldn't the death penalty also be merited in these cases too on behelf of the parents, family, and community? What about other crimes?

The truth is - we don't know which crimes will affect which people, nor in what ways. For example, in Post Traumatic Stress victims - it is often times times the case that a relentless barrage of traumatic events culminates into living as "a shell" - the symptoms may not even surface until years later, (

People may often be misled into minimalizing any one of their traumatic experiences, not understanding that people are vulnerable in different ways - and the culmination of traumatic events can debilitate anyone.

So - to argue that the death penalty is justified in favor of the rape victim, is to argue that it is just in favor towards their parents as well - who are often as decimated. And, this sounds a lot like arguing that the death penalty is merited when anyone is decimated, left as a shell - for any unjust reason.

B. Re. #2 - There is no Causality between the Death Penalty and Eliminating Rape: Many countries have enacted the death penalty for various crimes - and it certainly has not eliminated them altogether. Even in Israel - it was codified that Rape was to be met with the death penalty - yet it has not eliminated rape from occuring in Israel: Deuteronomy 22:25-28 - But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die.

The Death Penalty can discourage someone - who is rational - from commiting a crime. But often under the influence of alcohol, drugs, or even their own traumatic events - appealing to their rationality, in those states is not sufficient to stop them.

C. Re. #3 - There is no Casaulity between the Death Penalty and Psychological Mental Cures for the Victim: The death penalty is insufficient to cause this - and I would be interested in statistics that show otherwise. But - what is true, is that victims need a sense of closure, of safety, of finality - and sentencing a person to death does not stop them from anxiety when they walk down a street alone at night, nor can it prevent it from all of the turmoil in their minds, the nightmares, and so on.

D. Re. #4 - The Emotional Appeal for the Death Sentence Cannot End in Life:

As long as a parents or victims still hurt - there would always be a demand for justice. And how could a parent ever justify letting go of the pain - for their own children? The demand for more justice would never cease.

By appealing to reason, we know: death is not a sufficient condition that brings life; and, injecting a dependancy on death in order to bring life, only reinforces a cycle dependent on death.

Imagine a parent's heart, their rage. Their own shame: "I failed. Or, I wasn't there to protect them." Or even, "I am sitting here doing nothing." Imagine their turmoil while they try to negotiate between their "Rational Mind" and their "Emotional Mind" - to act in their "Wise Mind". What do they do? What if the government ignores the abduction of their children? Ignores the rape of their wife? Or the exploitation of their daughters on the Internet?

Is the death penalty still merited - even if the government refuses to enact it?

Does the parent, or the victim - then have the right to enact that justice themselves? Does that sentence also apply to all who facilitated those horrific acts? Since that parents' children were made victims - is there a just recourse to take the life of the offender's children?

In other words - appealing to the heart of a parent is the last thing you would want to do, because cities would literally be leveled, and we would be left with smoldering barren wastelands. How could there be an end to that kind of justice?

If, and only if, we could be certain that the death of an offender would certainly bring restoration, and life - to the victim - and everyone affected - could the Death Sentence be merited. And even then - all other possibilities would have to be excluded.

E. Appealing to Mercy is also forfeiting the Right to Demand a Death Sentence: Anyone who ever hopes to appeal to mercy cannot deny mercy to others. One cannot argue before a judge, or God: "I appeal under the Law of Mercy, to be Shown Mercy" - and then in the next breath demand for justice. The Judge will simply say: "You invoked the Jurisdiction of Mercy, regarding yourself - and so Condemnation has no authority regarding you."

It is therefore injust to appeal for mercy on one hand, and for the death penalty on the other.

F. Where the Death Penalty is Argued to Bring Life - this Argument is that Only Life can Bring Life:

Underneath it all Parents of the victims, and victims themselves - are deeply desperate for life, for restoration, reconciliation, even peace within themselves. The only just thing to do is: To give it to them - to validate their pain, to validate their need to express, to show them how - but in a life-giving way that ends the cycle of death, that doesn't inject more death into their lives.

What is certain - is that what is truly "just" - is to give them what they are desperate for - life, to restore peace within themselves, and for everyone affected.

As a society, can we inject life into the broken-hearted? Is it possible to restore the hope? I suggest yes - but not until arguments that Death can somehow bring Life are exhausted.

G. So - my question remains: how can depending on the death of others - bring life? It may work in farming, maybe even war. But, how could humanity ever be certain that death could ever bring life to an individual - life to the heart of another person?
Debate Round No. 2


Zain7 forfeited this round.


In Conclusion, I would like to Add ...

My Opponent Said:

"4. What if your daughter for example is a rape victim. what is "just" punishment for the rapist?? What is just for you? I am convinced that you could say could " DEATH SENTENCE"."

1. Arguing for the Death Penalty is Understandable:

While I was reading and responding to that question my opponent wrote - ... Someone very close to me just looked at me, in shock, wondering how I would react. I could not have possibly anticipated this question. I was literally shaking.

To be clear - I absolutely agree with my opponent in this way: a Parent's heart about these issues can never - no - they must never - be invalidated.

They have every right to feel that way, to feel - and to know - that imputing the Death Sentence would be just, and would fall within "Equanimity".

But even if the Death Penalty is Just, even Reasonable: it is not necessarily true that the Death Penalty is "moral", nor even a wise and fair action - which also advances life.

2. But, a Cycle of Death Cannot Restore a Broken Life:

Many of us are first-hand witnesses of how anyone could be decimated in circumstances like these.

And in the context of traumatic experience: we also know that "Death" can be incredibly toxic - and usually never affects just one person.

Because of all of these reasons - the Death Penalty should be beyond consideration - especially when hoping to restore the heart of someone desperate to find life again.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by jkdufu 5 months ago
Its too risky. So many people are already falsely accused of rape.
Posted by Ockham 5 months ago
What about someone who has sex with a girl who is too drunk to consent? Legally, that's rape, but most people would not say he should get the death penalty.
Posted by vi_spex 5 months ago
how many will be falsely accused
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by ballpit 5 months ago
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to Con due to the forfeiture in round 3 by pro. Arguments to con. Pro's arguments basically rest on the case that the person that is the victim is left a "Shell of their former selves" and con beautifully rebutes it by showing that the amount of assistance available is sufficient to help someone effected by this. They do this as well as show that pro's point that rape will end if the punishment of death is false using a source from Deuteronomy 22:25-28 showing that it has not deterred rape in the place that the death penalty is in effect. Good job to con on this debate as a whole.