• It makes sense.

    If you take someone's life away, you revoke your right to live. Why would we offer murders an all expenses paid life in prison (with taxpayers footing the bill) in return for taking away a life? It doesn't add up. My only stipulation would be that the murder must be heinous and there must be enough evidence to prove the the accused is in fact guilty of the crime.

  • The Punishment fits the Crime.

    We've already covered this issue in debate and my opponent failed on every single contention and I would argue they were initially weak to start. This is ultimately about justice for the many victims; punishment for a small group of particularly brutal and heinous murderers. I'll never understand why it has become fashionable to lobby on behalf of society's worst offenders with fallacy and lies.

  • "Turn the other cheek"

    Jesus told us to avoid having grudges against people. The death penalty is un-Godly, because it goes against the principle. Jesus told us not to have grudges against those who wronged us. Capital punishment is nothing more than eye for an eye in the modern era. Jail is much better and gives the person who did the crime a chance.

  • Not for me.

    I fail how it should be tolerated when it falls at almost every hurdle compared to far better alternatives. It's like tolerating gas chambers with lethal injection as two equal ways to kill someone. If you had to choose one to be the "better" way, wouldn't you just get rid of the other one? If not, why not? I don't see it at all; it's hypocritical.

  • All life is precious, and must be protected

    I'm not a religious nut or anything, in fact I'm basically an atheist, but I believe in the principle of life being precious. If you want proof of this then just look around. We are on a large rock with a molten center swirling around a giant nuclear explosion at around 60,000 miles per hour, and on this rock there is a group of organisms with cells arranged in such a fashion that they literally build their own world, contemplate their own existence, and sit here and decide whether or not they should let the species decide to kill one another. I mean life is so precious that we must do everything that we can to protect it. And we have absolutely no right to take away the privilege of sentient life from anybody.

  • Death is an escape, not a punishment.

    A lot of horrible criminals out there receive the death penalty with the thought that they are no longer a threat to society and 'punished accordingly.' The problem is, death is over quickly. The criminal does not suffer and if they do, it's only for a short time and then they're forgotten about. Most of these pieces of filth don't deserve this, it's too good for them.

    They deserve to suffer. They deserve life imprisonment with no hope of parole or bail. They deserve to have their rights stripped away and to be given long periods of time to think about what they've done, and more.

    Also, it does solve the problem of those wrongly put on death row and unfairly killed.

  • Why even bother?

    If you're going to punish people for retributive purposes, you might as well force them to live - the eventual boredom would be more than enough punishment for whatever crime they may have committed. I'm not going to add more fluff to this, so word limit word limit word limit.

  • Do humans have the right to take away life?

    I ultimately believe that there are no circumstances in which humans have the right to effectively murder other humans. Call it what you want, execution, removal of unwanted citizens - it's murder.
    If we do that, how are we better than them? What ever gives us that right? It's inhumane, giving no chance at redemption, and lets us sink to their level.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.