Update on the Death Penalty

Article Issue 87

0 Comments

Introduction

Across the years Christian Ethics Today has published some excellent articles on capital punishment. I will mention just four which I found helpful. They are “Capital Punishment: An Open Letter” by Curtis Freeman (1998), “The Death Penalty” by Millard Fuller (1998), “Karla Faye and Capital Punishment” by Joe E. Trull (2001), and “Prophetic Challenge to Capital Punishment” by Cody Sanders (2008). In this article I hope to provide a brief update on the death penalty worldwide together with some brief reflections on the principal arguments for and against the death penalty.

The Current Situation

On July 3 the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Ban Ki-moon, called on all member states to abolish the death penalty (http:// www.un.org/apps/news/story. asp?NewsID=42382&Cr=Human).

His call is in keeping with the fact that the worldwide trend is away from the death penalty. In 2000, 31 countries carried out an execution. In 2011, 20 countries did. According to Mr. Ban, about 150 countries have either abolished the death penalty or are no longer practicing it.

But almost a third of the world’s nations still have the death penalty. China executes hundreds if not thousands of people a year, more than all other countries combined. In 2011 the countries other than China with the most executions were Iran (360), Saudi Arabia (82), Iraq (68), and the United States (43). The United States is the only G-8 country with the death penalty. In North America and Europe only two countries have the death penalty, the United States and Belarus.

However, the trend in the United States is away from the death penalty. In 2000, 38 states had the death penalty. In 2012, 34 states have it. In 2000, 224 persons were sentenced to death in the United States. In 2011, 78 persons were sentenced to death. In 2000, 85 persons were executed in the United States. In 2011, 43 persons were executed (for the statistics in these two paragraphs, see the links at http://www.amnestyusa.org/ourwork/issues/death-penalty/us-deathpenalty-facts).

Arguments for the Death Penalty

Last year, an outstanding political There is no convincing evidence that the death penalty serves as a deterrent. leader in my state told me that the death penalty is something about which good people differ. I agree. There are thoughtful and honorable people on both sides of this issue, and they all have reasons for their convictions. Those who support the death penalty say that some people do things so awful that they deserve to die. They point out that executing these people prevents them from harming anyone else. They believe that execution is a deterrent which reduces the incidence of violent crimes. Some say that it provides comfort to the victims of violent crimes and to their families and loved ones. Some Christians believe that the Bible teaches that we should execute criminals.

I know that some good, thoughtful people believe these things deeply. Nevertheless, I remain unconvinced.

I agree that some people do things so awful that, if society follows the understanding of justice known as lex talionis (“life for life,” Exodus 21:23Health Care: The Endless Debate by David Sapp 25), they deserve to die. But society does not have to follow that understanding of justice. It is all right for a society to treat people better than they deserve. God does that with us all. It’s called grace.

It’s true that executing a criminal prevents the criminal from killing again. But that can be achieved with imprisonment, too.

There is no convincing evidence that the death penalty serves as a deterrent. A 2009 survey of about 500 police chiefs–who ought to know–found that even though most of them support the death penalty, 57% of them concede that it does not deter violence because most people who commit violent acts rarely consider the possible consequences of their violence (see http://www. deathpenaltyinfo.org/documents/ CostsRptFinal.pdf).

Some people seem to find comfort in the execution of those who murdered their loves ones, but others do not. Some family members of murder victims work to abolish the death penalty (see http://www.mvfr.org).

Arguments against the Death Penalty

I find the arguments of those who oppose the death penalty much more convincing.

One compelling argument is that sometimes innocent people have been executed (http://www.theatlantic. com/national/archive/2012/05/yesamerica-we-have-executed-an-innocent-man/257106/).

Another is the presence of racial and economic bias in the administration of capital punishment (http://www.ali.org/doc/Capital%20 Punishment_web.pdf).

Another is the concern of social conservatives about giving government the authority to administer the ultimate punishment (http://sojo.net/magazine/2009/07/when-governments-kill).

Social conservatives can also appreciate the argument that the massive costs of administering the death penalty are not sensible. Many people understandably assume that it is cheaper to execute murderers than to keep them imprisoned for life, but that isn’t the case. For example, an exhaustive 2011 study of the death penalty system in California contains this conclusion: “Since reinstating the death penalty in 1978, California taxpayers have spent roughly $4 billion to fund a dysfunctional death penalty system that has carried out tion. What you have in this small book is a candid, fascinating pilgrimage of a man through agnosticism, atheism, and on to a vibrant commitment to Jesus as Lord and Saviour. But the heart of the book is a basic and intriguing response specifically to perhaps the world’s most publicized atheist, Richard Dawkins, and his book, “The God Delusion”. That Scott’s book is eminently readable is an understatement. One of the author’s purposes is to put his response into laymen’s language without the scientific or theological jargon that is often unintelligible to many. He uses the novel approach of addressing seven letters to Dawkins, picking up on Dawkins’ major themes and responding with some very solid Christian responses to the issues he has raised. It is far from a narrow-minded diatribe. The issues raised are timely, rational, convincing, giving the searching student in this area some solid ground to aid in the vital Christian apologetic. Scott possesses genuine rhetorical skills in his writing and philosophical approach, resulting in some very helpful approaches to an extremely important field of study. The book is worth its price because of the author’s skillful and timely use of dozens of apt quotations from multiple sources. His end notes will confirm this. Any speaker will find this quite useful as a resource. Another strength of the book is its organization with the “letter approach” as it copes with the extremely serious issues that Dawkins had raised…i.e. the Christian history of violence, God and suffering, the ascendancy of science, the rise of fundamentalism, the very existence of God, the mistakes in the Bible and, of course, evolution versus creationism. Anyone reading this book will find that one can think almost immediately of someone they know who needs it. Please spread the word! ■ no more than 13 executions.” That is, of course, vastly more than would have been spent if the death penalty were abolished and California had imprisoned its violent criminals rather than attempting to execute them. (See http://media.lls.edu/documents/ LoyolaLawReview_CADeathPenalty. pdf).

These arguments are decisive for many people today. I understand that. They all seem right to me. I also understand the sense of horror some people intuitively feel when they reflect seriously about the fact that their government is executing people.

But I am trying to be a follower of the way of Jesus; so for me the decisive reason for opposing the death penalty is the gospel that Jesus brought. Jesus said: “Be ye merciful as your Father in heaven is merciful” (Luke 6:36). I think mercy is the right way of life for individual Christians and for churches. I believe it is also good social policy. In our society we are in a position to follow Jesus’ teaching about mercy. We can stop executing murderers and at the same time protect the public from murderers by keeping them in prison and at the same time not run the risk of executing innocent persons and at the same time save billions of dollars. I think that is what we should do. ■

Fisher Humphreys is retired professor at Samford University in Birmingham, AL and is a member of the Board of Directors of Christian Ethics Today.