Death Penalty As a Specific Moral Issue - Essay Example

SPECIFIC MORAL ISSUES: DEATH PENALTY Kayala _______(write your full here)_______(Write your subject/class details here), Grade: 10 November___(write the date you want here), 2007 There is currently no death penalty in Massachusetts, life without the possibility of parole being the only punishment for first-degree murder. The federal government prosecutes capital cases within Massachusetts, however. On November 7, 2007, House lawmakers again overwhelmingly rejected a bill to reinstate the death penalty by a vote of 46 - 110. Two years earlier in 2005, the House defeated Governor Romney's legislation 53 - 100. Continue reading for a full Massachusetts history. The first recorded judicial execution in Massachusetts took place in 1630 and the last executions were on May 9, 1947. In total, there have been approximately 345 executions within Massachusetts, including 26 convicted of witchcraft. Until 1951, murder in the first degree called for a mandatory punishment of death. In 1951, the law was changed to allow the jury the discretion to recommend against a death sentence after considering mitigating circumstances - in which case the sentence would be life imprisonment -unlessthe murder was committed in connection with a rape or attempted rape, in which case the death sentence was mandatory. In 1968, voters expressed disapproval with this trend in a non-binding referendum, voting 49 to 31 percent in support of continued use of the death penalty. During the 1970's and 80's, a series of judicial rulings eventually eliminated the death penalty altogether under Massachusetts law: In 1972, the US Supreme Court decision of Furman vs. Georgia, threw out Georgia's death penalty as cruel and unusual, citing the arbitrary and capricious manner in which it was administered, and leading to capital statutes throughout the country being overturned. For Massachusetts, this meant that the discretionary death penalty for murder was nullified, but the mandatory death penalty for rape-murder was left intact for the time being (Cf.Commonwealth v. Harrington, 1975). On October 28, 1980, the SJC ruled inDistrict Attorney for the Suffolk Dist. v. Watsonthat a new capital statute signed into law by Governor Edward King the previous November (c. 488, Acts of 1979) was unconstitutionally cruel for all the reasons laid out inO'Nealand their opinion of the proposed 1977 bill. On November 2, 1982, voters approved by referendum (54 to 35 percent) an amendment to Article 26. The amendment, Article 116of the Massachusetts Constitution, states that: No provision of the Constitution... shall be construed as prohibiting the imposition of the punishment of death. This completed the amendment process, which had been initiated in 1980 by legislators acted quickly to draft another new death penalty bill. On December 15, 1982, the House and Senate passed legislation providing for capital punishment for first-degree murder. The bill was signed into law (c. 554, Acts of 1982) a week later by Governor King and went into effect on January 1st. This 1982 statute was invalidated by the SJC on October 18, 1984 in the case ofCommonwealth v. Colon-Cruz. While the death penaltyper sewas no longer forbidden by the Constitution, this particular statute improperly encouraged defendants in murder cases to plead guilty rather than face a jury trial, thus avoiding the possibility of the death sentence, and violating the right against self-incrimination and the right to trial by jury. Massachusetts has remained without a valid death penalty law ever since. Subsequent attempts to reinstate the death penalty have failed: By the time of theColon-Cruzdecision, Michael Dukakis had become governor again. Throughout these two terms, a nearly evenly divided legislature never passed a bill - which the governor would have certainly vetoed. In 1991, William Weld became governor. He, and every governor since, argued for death penalty reinstatement. In October 1997, both the House and Senate passed bills to reinstate the death penalty. On November 6, the conference committee bill failed on a tie vote (80-80) in the House after a single legislator switched his position. An attempt to reinstate the death penalty failed on a 73-80 vote in the House on March 29, 1999. On March 12, 2001, reinstatement bills were rejected in the House with a vote of 60-94. Four bills, which would reinstate the death penalty, were introduced in the 2003-2004 legislative session; hearings were held on March 27, 2003 at which only opponents of the bills appeared to give testimony, and no vote was ever taken. Confronted with a growing number of wrong murder convictions in Massachusetts as well as in other states, and looking back on the failed attempts of two previous governors to reinstate the death penalty, Governor Romney established a blue-ribbon commission to address legislators' concerns over innocence. On May 3, 2004, the Governor's Council on Capital Punishment issued their Final Report, with recommendations for creating a system "as infallible as humanly possible." Legislation based on these recommendations was finally filed on April 28, 2005, but defeated in the House on November 15 on a vote of 53-100. On November 7, 2007, House lawmakers again overwhelmingly rejected a bill to reinstate the death penalty by a vote of 46-110. The vote effectively killed any chance of the bill becoming law for the 2007 session. (House lawmakers reject death penalty bill, The Boston Globe), (Bedau, Hugo, The Death Penalty in America: Current Controversies) Mosaic Law and the Death Penalty: The Mosaic Law establishes the death penalty for a number of crimes. Not every violation of the 10 commandments was a capital crime, but the death penalty is given for some form of nearly all the 10 commandments (like much of what follows, this chart is drawn, with modifications, from an essay by James Jordan): 1st Idolatry Enticement to idolatry 13:1-10; 17:2-5, 3rd Blasphemy 24:11-16, 4th Sabbath violation Ex 31:14-15; 35:2, 21:18-21; Ex 21:17, 6th Murder Premeditated murder Ex 21:12-14, 7th Adultery Various sexual crimes Lev 20, 8th Theft Man stealing Ex 21:16, 9th False witness Perjury in capital case Deut 19:15-21. (The death penalty in the Mosaic Law: Five exploratory essays) Jesus' Teachings and the Death Penalty: - Jesus did support the death penalty and He left a hearty biblical record proving the point. The Mosaic Law very strongly supported the death penalty and Jesus never once disobeyed the law or taught against it. He said, "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill" (Matt.5: 17). The law made numerous provisions for the death penalty. Jesus did not come to destroy these provisions but to fulfill them. As such, He would have supported the death penalty. The women who committed adultery: This story is told in John 8:3-11. The scribes and Pharisees sought to find something against Jesus. Their method of operation was to ask a question or present a problem in which either solution would hurt Jesus. In this case, they presented the woman taken in adultery and reminded Jesus, "Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou" (v.5). If He upheld the law; the meek and lowly Jesus would be portrayed as cruel. If He made an exception to the law, He would be in favor of breaking the law. In either case, His bond with the people would be broken. However, Jesus did the unexpected. He stooped down and wrote with His finger on the ground. What He wrote, we are not told. When the Pharisees insisted on an answer, He said, "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her" (v.7) and continued writing. One interesting fact about this story: only the woman was brought. No man was accused. Yet, adultery is definitely a two-person sin. At any rate, the consciences of the accusers began to accuse their own hearts. One by one, beginning with the eldest, they slipped away until no man was there to accuse the woman. With no accusers, there was no required penalty. Jesus had used the occasion to point out the hypocrisy of the scribes and Pharisees while at the same time showing His love to the unloved. He told the woman to go and sin no more. This is a wonderful illustration of the grace of God, but it is not proof that Jesus opposed the death penalty. In fact, He made a direct statement of His support. Again, in dealing with the scribes and Pharisees, when they accused the disciples for not washing before eating, Jesus said, "But he answered and said unto them, why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition For God commanded, saying, Honor thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death." Matthew 15:3-4 He then described (v.5-6) how the Pharisees allowed someone to hold back needed help for their parents by saying that it was a gift to God. This was the dedication of their possessions to the temple to be given at the time of their death. Of course, they could do anything they wanted with thisgiftuntil they died. But in the eyes of the Pharisees it freed them from their obligation to honor their mother and father by caring for them in their old age. One more proof can be found in the ministry and message of the Apostle Paul. Paul told those to whom he ministered, "Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ" (1 Corinthians 11:1). Paul was not sinless as His Savior was. But he was meticulous in his service to God (see Philippians 3:4-6). And, according to his own testimony, he was careful to follow the life of Jesus Christ. Certainly, if Jesus had been opposed to the death penalty, then so would Paul have been.However, Paul recognized the justice of the death penalty. When he was brought before the judgment seat of Festus, he said, "For if I be an offender, or have committed any thing worthy of death, I refuse not to die" (Acts 25:11). By this, Paul admitted that there were offenses worthy of death and that the government had the right to administer death in those cases. He further warns, "But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil" (Romans 13:4). The powers that be bear the sword to execute wrath on those that do evil. What do you think these powers are going to do with the sword Are they going to slap someone on the wrist with it No. They are going to "execute wrath" by executing someone. They are going to administer the death penalty. God Himself established the death penalty long before the law was given to Moses. He told Noah, "And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man's brother will I require the life of man" (Gen.9: 5). This command has never been repealed. Not by the New Testament. Not by Paul. Not by Jesus Himself. The Jesus of the Bible supported the death penalty. It was not His purpose for coming. Therefore, He said only a little about it. But He supported it nonetheless. When He returns to the earth the next time, His perspective will be different. Then, He will come as judge and will be executing the death penalty (see Revelation 19:11-15). Jesus believed in the death penalty. It was established by God, codified by the law, supported by Jesus Himself and sustained by the Apostle Paul. Theologians have no biblical evidence against it, only their perception ofanother Jesus. (The death penalty and the Hebrew Bible: The religious basis of the law or paganizing civilization) Interviews For Or Against the Death Penalty: My mother, Robin: She is very much against the death penalty. In her, view this is very inhumane and she says that since only God has the right to give life, thus only God has the right to take life. My father, James: He supports the re-implementation of the death penalty law, because he feels that that the crime rate is going sky-high. He also feels that the death penalty will deter future criminals from committing crimes. My friend, Angelica Cimino, Grade-10: She is against the death penalty, because she believes that education and religion needed for the 'criminals', not just a noose around their neck. She also believes that now-a-days movies romanticize violence, crime and killing, thus the creation of new or 'wanna-be' criminals, she says that we must change the 'system' not the 'victims of the system'. My friend, Michael Rossetti, Grade-12: He supports the death penalty, because he believes in, 'the elimination of evil'. According to him, death penalty is the quickest way of doing that. Me: I'm totally against the death penalty because I believe that as humans every one sins and makes mistakes, some more than others. I also believe that there is no sin, too great that is unforgivable by the Almighty as long as we repent sincerely. References: - Bedau, Hugo, The Death Penalty in America: Current Controversies, 1997, New York: Oxford University Press House lawmakers reject death penalty bill, The Boston Globe, NY Times Co., November 7, 2007: http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2007/11/07/house_lawmakers_reject_death_penalty_bill/ http://www.nodp.org/ma/stacks/globe_110797.html http://www.nodp.org/ma/stacks/globe_033099.html http://www.nodp.org/ma/stacks/globe_031301.html http://www.nodp.org/ma/stacks/sentinel_032803.html http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/11/16/death_penalty_bill_fails_in_house/ The death penalty in the Mosaic Law: Five exploratory essays, by James B. Jordan, 1989, Biblical Horizons The Bible and the Death Penalty, by Harold W. Attridge, Yale University Press, August 28, 2007 The death penalty and the Hebrew Bible: The religious basis of the law or paganizing civilization, Raymond Lee Chambers, Bainbridge College, 1988 Read More