I chose to examine the death penalty debate between President Obama and Alan Keyes in 2004. At that time I basically stated that I sided with President Obama mostly due to Mr. Keyes claiming that the people who have/had the power to apply the death penalty were no better than the "slaveowners" of yesterday. While I see where he's coming from, I don't really agree with that point of view, but I'm not necessarily against to what he's saying either. That particular debate piqued my interest to dive into this highly debatable topic even further than what I did the first time. With that, I'm going to explain some different point's of view from individuals that claim pro life and ones that still claim pro life, but are also pro choice.
Some of the arguments that I’ve seen thrown out there from the pro life advocates are as follows: 1. Capital punishment costs much more than keeping ...view middle of the document...
Could possibly get out and do the same thing all over again. 4. Overpopulation in the prison system. 5. “Justice is better served” (USLegal.com, 2013).
Both parties have very valid and sound arguments. It’s hard to sit here and say who is right and wrong because in my eyes I believe it is mostly opinion as to what the better method of punishment is overall. Like both Mr. Keyes and President Obama stated in their 2004 debate, I think the death penalty is very situational. There are vast differences between crimes that are done in the heat of the moment and crimes that are premeditated. In some ways the death penalty does come off as being very barbaric, especially when the United States is compared to other parts of the world that claim democracy. As of now, the only other democratic country that still supports the death penalty is Japan (cnn.com, 2014). When looking at it from that point of view, it is very hard to defend the thought process behind capital punishment to society, no matter how many valid points are made. The singular fact that there are only two democratic countries in the entire world supporting the death penalty, makes it seem as if we are way behind in the times.
With all that being said, I can’t really say that I disagree with agree completely with either party. I do believe the death penalty is warranted in certain scenarios, but being that those scenarios could be based off of bias opinion, generally stating that the death penalty is warranted would be wrong to say. What might convince me to say that the death penalty is just, another might say the complete opposite. Everybody has their own threshold for different situations and also different emotions towards different situations. If I had to pick between the two and basing my justification on the facts that I have presented, I would sway to the side of pro life more so than pro choice. Even though I know that if I were presented with a situation that might have my emotions in a state of disarray, my opinion would most likely change.
