death penalty and religion essay

Religious Values and Death Penalty

This essay will explore the relationship between religious values and the death penalty. It will discuss various religious perspectives on capital punishment and how these beliefs influence the ethical debate on this issue. PapersOwl offers a variety of free essay examples on the topic of Crime.

How it works

Religious and moral values tell us that killing is wrong. Thou shall not kill. To me, the death penalty is inhumane. Killing people makes us like the murderers that most of us despise. No imperfect system should have the right to decide who lives and who dies. The government is made up of imperfect humans, who make mistakes. The only person that should be able to take life, is god.

“An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind”. (Gandhi) Two wrongs do not make a right.

You simply can’t justify a wrong by doing something equally as wrong. I believe everyone deserves a second chance. I think many people are on death row and in our prisons because they never got any first chances. The death penalty doesn’t seem to recognize that guilty people have the possibility to change, and it rejects their chance to ever rejoin and contribute to society.

Anyone can change and be rehabilitated. We live in troubling times and the easiest path would be to get rid of criminals altogether but imagine a world where we can change lives instead of taking them. You cannot introduce new ideas into someone’s head by chopping it off.

The risk of executing innocent people exists in any imperfect justice system. Since 1973, 123 people in 25 states have been released from death row with evidence of innocence. Innocent people are imprisoned and executed all the time. As in ‘Just Mercy, police officers and prosecutors, whether they are under pressure from the public, or trying to further their careers, seem to make quick arrests and completely ignore evidence that might point to innocence. There have been and always will be cases of executions of innocent people. No matter how developed a justice system seems to be, it will always remain at risk for human failure. Unlike prison sentences, where people can be released upon new evidence, the death penalty is permanent and non-reparable.

The death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment. I read that In April 2005, in (The Lancet) a team of medical researchers found flaws in how lethal injections were being given, which caused extreme suffering to the person being executed. The report found “that in 43 of the 49 executed prisoners studied the anesthetic administered during lethal injection was lower than required for surgery. In 43 percent of cases, drug levels were consistent with awareness.”

Here is an article I read on botched executions. “On December 13, 2006, a man named Angel Nieves Diaz was the victim of a botched execution so terrible that it led Florida’s Republican Governor and death penalty enthusiast Jeb Bush to issue an executive order halting executions in the state. Technicians wrongly inserted the needles carrying the poisons that were to kill Diaz. The chemicals poured into his soft tissues instead of his veins. This left Diaz struggling and mouthing words in pain for over 34 minutes, when a second set of needles were inserted. The county medical examiner found 12-inch chemical burns inside both of his arms after the execution”. I also watched a video at home of a prisoner with a botched execution and it was horrific to watch, and it actually brought tears to my eyes.

Cite this page

Religious values and Death penalty. (2020, Mar 23). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/religious-values-and-death-penalty/

"Religious values and Death penalty." PapersOwl.com , 23 Mar 2020, https://papersowl.com/examples/religious-values-and-death-penalty/

PapersOwl.com. (2020). Religious values and Death penalty . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/religious-values-and-death-penalty/ [Accessed: 31 Oct. 2024]

"Religious values and Death penalty." PapersOwl.com, Mar 23, 2020. Accessed October 31, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/religious-values-and-death-penalty/

"Religious values and Death penalty," PapersOwl.com , 23-Mar-2020. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/religious-values-and-death-penalty/. [Accessed: 31-Oct-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2020). Religious values and Death penalty . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/religious-values-and-death-penalty/ [Accessed: 31-Oct-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

Featured Topics

Featured series.

A series of random questions answered by Harvard experts.

Explore the Gazette

Read the latest.

Lessons learned from being only man in class

Key to negotiated peace in Ukraine? Having the West keep Russia honest.

World appears on track for even more dangerous Cold War 2.0

Francis X. Clooney: “If we quote a verse out of Genesis or another verse out of the Letter to the Romans without due attention to context, we run the risk of ‘proof texting’: finding a verse in the Bible that justifies what you feel you should do today.”

File photo by Kris Snibbe/Harvard Staff Photographer

The death penalty and Christianity

Paul Massari

Harvard Divinity School Communications

A Q&A with Francis X. Clooney examines how both sides in an endless debate seek biblical backing

The botched execution of Oklahoma death row inmate Clayton Lockett in April ignited a national discussion about capital punishment that was followed by fresh debate over the executions of three felons last week in Missouri, Georgia, and Florida.

Christians on both sides of the issue have been weighing in on capital punishment, saying that Scripture supports their position.

R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, has argued that “ the Bible clearly calls for capital punishment in the case of intentional murder .” But Christian activist and author Shane Claiborne has countered that the teachings of Jesus provide no support for the death penalty .

To add context and nuance to the conversation, Paul Massari of Harvard Divinity School Communications turned to Francis X. Clooney, Parkman Professor of Divinity and professor of comparative theology and director of the Center for the Study of World Religions at the School.

Clooney questions the reasoning of those who say Christians should support the death penalty, but also suggests that opponents who quote Jesus may not be comfortable with the logical extension of the teachings they cite. Absolute opposition to the death penalty may seem out of touch with a realistic view of the world; tolerance of it may seem far removed from the teachings of Jesus.

HARVARD DIVINITY SCHOOL (HDS): How do you understand the assertion, articulated by Christians like Dr. Mohler, that “God affirmed the death penalty for murder as he made his affirmation of human dignity clear” in the Bible?

CLOONEY: It strikes me as not unexpected, since Christians have often enough argued for such punishments, reconciling them with a view of God’s plan as set out in the Bible. But what Jesus would say is often treated differently. A few years ago, I went to Mass one Sunday at a local parish. The Gospel was the part of the Sermon on the Mount where Jesus says, “Turn the other cheek. Do not resist evil.” The homilist said, “The teaching of Jesus is radical nonviolence. But that’s not the teaching of the church, so let me now tell you about the teaching of the church.” He went on for another 20 minutes about just-war theory and the legitimate use of force by the state, and so on. The views of Jesus were not mentioned again.

This is a typical situation. On the one hand there’s Jesus, and we’ll never criticize Jesus. On the other hand there’s the way we do things — and the way most Christians have done things for a long time. It is not surprising that in Christian arguments for the death penalty, Jesus doesn’t really come up at all. Many of us find him too radical for everyday life.

HDS: But are they saying, “This is the way we do things,” or, “The Bible calls for capital punishment in the name of human dignity”?

CLOONEY: Many Christians — Southern Baptists, Protestants, and Catholics, too — will say both. They look at the Bible and say, “Clearly the death penalty can be found in the Bible,” and find guidance there for what the states should do in 2014. Most are not reckless in their calls for capital punishment. Leaders such as Dr. Mohler recognize the continuing need to respect human nature, the possibility of the abuse of government power, the dangers of state-sponsored violence, and the miscarriages of justice that not infrequently have taken place. They’re not saying, “Kill people without hesitation, or because they merely deserve to be killed.”

They’re also saying that the death penalty doesn’t permit individuals or lynch mobs to take the law into their own hands and go out and kill those they think should be killed. They recognize human dignity, but also legitimacy of the death penalty, and they try to make the case that these go together. In this way of thinking, such power is given over to the state, in accord with the theory of the legitimate role of state power, which goes back to the Middle Ages and before.

HDS: So, in this view, capital punishment and respect for human dignity are separate commandments from God, but not necessarily tied to one another?

CLOONEY: They’re interrelated in the sense that they both come from the plan of God. For Dr. Mohler, these commands are not contradictory either. Rather, respect human nature, and, in some rare cases, take the life of fellow human beings, particularly those who kill other humans. It is as if to say, “Because we respect life, we take life.” By this view, neither value replaces the other. They’re not saying, “We kill people because they don’t deserve human respect,” but they also refuse to say, “Respect for human beings means that you can never kill anyone.” Rather, the thinking goes, respect for human life and capital punishment are distinct issues, and a Christian can hold both.

HDS: What about the Biblical passages cited by Christians who support capital punishment? Is there a larger context to these that adds some complexity?

CLOONEY: Passages can be found that sanction putting someone to death, and many a text reports the killing of individuals and groups. But the path from one or another Bible verse to state policy today is very complicated. If we quote a verse out of Genesis or another verse out of the Letter to the Romans without due attention to context, we run the risk of “proof texting”: finding a verse in the Bible that justifies what you feel you should do today. Centuries of modern Biblical scholarship have shown us that these texts don’t float free of their contexts. You have to read them according to the intentions of the author, the options of the time, and so on. Rarely can they be applied without modification to the world in which we live.

Take the Genesis text, where after the great flood God is bringing the world back to life. In that context, God stresses the sacredness of human life, and therefore predicts and warns: “Whoever sheds the blood of a human, by a human shall that person’s blood be shed;for in his own image God made humankind” [Genesis 9:6]. This saying could be taken a number of ways. It could sanction the death penalty, or it could simply remind us that violence leads to more violence. If you kill, your blood will be taken in turn.

Human life is always sacred. By elaborate reasoning, I suppose, it could be taken to justify killing those who kill, and thus to support the death penalty in 21st-century America. But it could more easily be argued as having very little to do with the death penalty in today’s America.

All of this is difficult. It is a problem to take any verse out of context. It is also a problem to think that in 2014 we can apply verses from the Bible directly to the policies of Texas or Oklahoma or the federal government, and thus justify the death penalty. Yet, to be honest, it would also be a problem to end up in a position where no Biblical verse ever provides guidance in 2014. So some balance of verse and context is needed. On the whole, I am not at all convinced that any biblical verses support the modern world’s use of the death penalty.

HDS: Is it ever possible for capital punishment to be applied in a way that makes moral sense?

CLOONEY: Since we live in a world tainted by sin, and since things that aren’t desirable or ideal are still part of what it takes to live in this imperfect world, then hard and realistic compromises are often necessary. Most of us most of the time do not live out the example of Jesus without compromise. Some believe that in a hard and violent world, the death penalty is a necessary evil. On a larger social scale, some Christians defend going to war and killing people either in direct combat or by bombing armies or cities. If we lived in an ideal world, there wouldn’t be any wars, or a death penalty. But the world is not ideal, and so we kill. Such is the logic.

HDS: So is the Christian view to say, “No more war. No more fighting. Conscientious objection. Never the death penalty,” and so on? Or is it to say, “In the world in which we live, let’s talk about the death penalty. What are the rationale and the evidence that the death penalty serves a useful social function?”

CLOONEY: This is exactly what each of us needs to decide. Even if we wish to follow the radical example of Jesus, we still need to use the intelligence God has given us.

Even aside from how we use the Bible in this debate, the death penalty is subject to doubt, and it’s quite possible to give a hard time to its proponents. Is there evidence that it does any good? Isn’t it rather often a matter of revenge? It is supposed to be a matter of warning people: “Don’t do that because you’ll get killed if you do”? But do such warnings work as a deterrent? And what are the collateral effects of trivializing human life by killing people for any reason? Where’s the evidence that the death penalty is applied fairly and that there’s no systemic bias involved?

In the end, I think a lot of people — maybe even a majority of people who think seriously about these issues — would say that the evidence is just not there that the death penalty achieves a good commensurate with the evil of giving the state permission to take life. Accordingly, arguments about all these points are quite common today, of course, and that is for the better. Quoting the Bible or any sacred text does not excuse us from debating the evidence for and against the death penalty.

HDS: So where do you draw the line in the discussion between morality and the real world? For instance, supporters might say that the death penalty would be a deterrent if cases weren’t tied up in court and we executed sentences more efficiently. If that were true, would capital punishment be OK?

CLOONEY: Good point. Certainly one can say, “Neither this nor that is absolute, so we just have to make a prudential judgment based on effectiveness.” Does the state have a right to control handguns, or enforce traffic laws, or to arrest someone who’s robbing a bank, abusing a child, running a corrupt Wall Street firm, or polluting the environment on a massive scale? Of course it does. And of course we have to try to be fair in the application of the law, improving an imperfect system.

In an ideal justice system, the death penalty might conceivably be carried out fairly and without bias. But since our justice system is not ideal, that hope is not very plausible. And so, in today’s society, we still have to debate whether the death penalty serves any good purpose, just as we can debate whether life imprisonment without the possibility of parole serves any legitimate purpose that does anyone any good.

HDS: Death penalty supporters say that the Bible doesn’t say that human life is an absolute value. People get killed in the Bible all the time. Other values have to come in.

CLOONEY: Yes, but we need to be very cautious in then making a list of values that are superior to human life. Moreover, values are interconnected, woven together. In the Catholic Church, for instance, there’s the ideal of the “seamless garment of life.” From conception to a natural death not hastened by poverty or injustice, life is an absolute value that must always be respected. You can’t sacrifice a human life for the sake of another good you have decided to be of greater value. You can’t say that human life is worth respecting only some of the time. If you do, where do you draw the line? Best to say, from conception to old age, all human life is to be respected, protected, and enabled to flourish. Neither abortion nor the death penalty is tolerable; neither is the ruining of lives by systemic poverty and the violence that makes so many suffer their whole lives long. In fact we tolerate many things that demean human flourishing, particularly when others, far away, are affected rather than ourselves. But in our better moments we can hardly condone such callousness.

HDS: Most Biblical citations of Christians who support the death penalty draw from the Old Testament. So where does Jesus come in?

CLOONEY: The worldly view, even among Christians, is that you can’t run society based on the principles of Jesus. If everybody turned the other cheek, then all the “bad” people would win. If everyone gave up his or her wealth, society would collapse. So you need to seek out other references in the Bible.

Opponents to the death penalty are surely right in holding that Jesus wouldn’t allow it. The incidents we see in the Gospels — the woman caught in adultery, for instance — reject killing, and reject the self-righteousness and anger that lead us to kill. Jesus clearly says, “Turn the other cheek.”

If Christian death penalty supporters want to adhere to the Bible, they need to face up to the exemplar of Jesus, too, and not leave him out of the picture when defending the death penalty. Every word of the Bible then needs to be reread in light of the teachings of Jesus.

To be fair, those of us defending the radical nonviolence of Jesus similarly need to read the whole of the Bible as well, not merely ignoring the parts we’d rather not think about.

HDS: Is it a matter of Christianity with Jesus or without Jesus? Every church wants to have Jesus at the center, but also wants to put in other principles, as well as accommodating moral and political issues. But is the example in the Gospels the only one for being a good Christian?

CLOONEY: No Christian will want to promote Christianity without Jesus at its center. A Christianity grounded in the Gospels and thus in the life and death of Jesus will end up being radical Christianity.  It will hold to standards that resist merely coming to terms with any given political situation, catering to the whims of the state and the majority, and so on. But accommodation to political realities will still take place. Think of St. Paul’s “real world” accommodation of cultural conditions, the fact of empire, etc.

HDS: You mention St. Paul. Why do death penalty supporters often cite his writings?

CLOONEY: Paul lived in the Roman Empire and had to make space for the Christian community amidst Roman power. He had to show that Christians were not the enemy of the state, and that Christianity was not opposed to all civil power. And so Paul had to talk about respecting authority, paying taxes, the power that kings have, etc. In his Letter to the Romans, he writes: “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities; for there is no authority except from God, and those authorities that exist have been instituted by God” [Romans 13:1].

The radical alternative would have been to be a fringe group that the Romans would have sought to destroy — and that might well have died out, like many others. The history of how the church came to be amidst the empire is a well-known topic, and many scholars have written on how Christianity learned to live with — and benefit from — imperial power. That’s our history, right down to the death penalty, and there is much to be ashamed of.

And yet, to be fair, even Jesus seems to admit some accommodation. There’s the scene where he’s asked whether or not the Jews should pay the Roman tax, and he says, “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s” [Matthew 22:21]. He doesn’t say that it’s all God’s, as if Caesar has no power or realm of authority.

But still, there is no direct path from giving to Caesar what is Caesar’s to the death penalty in one or another American state today. Much exegesis and many prudential arguments must occur in between, before we might get anywhere near justifying the death penalty simply because Jesus spoke those words in Matthew 22.

HDS: So, are Christians like Dr. Mohler arguing for a position that is actually “worldly,” but portraying it as wisdom received from God?

CLOONEY: Again, this requires a difficult balance. On the one hand, he’s employing a certain kind of Biblical literalism, where we take the words at face value as assertive of truths that can be directly applied in 2014. God says it’s OK to kill people under certain circumstances, so the states have the authority to execute prisoners now.

Others among us remain very skeptical, and do not believe we honor God’s word by such direct and seemingly simplistic applications.

On the other hand, Dr. Mohler seems to be assuming that the death penalty is justified because it’s good for American society today. But the evidence for that opinion is open to dispute, as I mentioned above. Quoting some passages from the Bible does not end the debate. But in the end, perhaps the burden is still greater for those who oppose the death penalty because it is not in keeping with the teachings and life of Jesus. If we really believe that, then we need to act like Jesus all the time, not just when it is the death penalty that is up for debate.

Share this article

You might like.

Or how a gender-equality seminar sparked change for women in Côte d’Ivoire

Former defense minister says U.S., allies need to continue financial, arms aid, remove curbs on missiles to bring Putin to table

Pulitzer winner warns China, which is building nuclear arsenal, would be third major player besides U.S., Russia — and six other nations now have bombs, too.

How to fight depression? Faster.

Hope flags when medications fail, isolating and endangering patients. Backed by a major grant, 2 Harvard scientists are focused on reducing the distance between diagnosis and recovery.

Plastics are everywhere, even in our bodies

We ingest equivalent of credit card per week — how worried should we be? In ‘Harvard Thinking,’ experts discuss how to minimize exposure, possible solutions.

Why do election polls seem to have such a mixed track record?

Democratic industry veteran looks at past races, details adjustments made amid shifting political dynamics in nation

• Entertainment
• Environment
• Information Science and Technology
• Social Issues

Home Essay Samples Social Issues Death Penalty

Religion and the Death Penalty: A Complex Intersection

Table of contents, introduction, christian perspectives on the death penalty, islam and capital punishment, buddhism and the rejection of the death penalty, hinduism: a spectrum of beliefs, judaism: from biblical law to modern interpretations, the social and political implications, works cited.

*minimum deadline

Cite this Essay

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below

• Affirmative Action
• Asian American Discrimination
• Immigration in America
• Black Lives Matter
• Social Responsibility
• Prohibition

Related Essays

Need writing help?

You can always rely on us no matter what type of paper you need

*No hidden charges

100% Unique Essays

Absolutely Confidential

Money Back Guarantee

By clicking “Send Essay”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement. We will occasionally send you account related emails

You can also get a UNIQUE essay on this or any other topic

Thank you! We’ll contact you as soon as possible.

We have to use cookies to be sure that our website functions properly. Click here for more information about our Cookie Policy and then tap Allow to continue your work

Top Special Offer! Check discount here

Get 13% off your first order - use TopStart13 discount code now!

• Admission Essay Writing
• Essay Writers for Hire
• Essays for Sale
• Pay for Research Paper
• Dissertation Writing Help
• Case Study Writing Help
• Buy Assignments
• Buy Thesis Paper
• Buy Coursework
• Buy Term Paper
• Essay Editing
• Research Paper Editing
• How it works
• TopEssayWriting Reviews
• Conclusion Generator
• Paraphrasing Tool
• Top Writers
• Social Issues

Human Rights

Death Penalty

The Death Penalty and Religion

The capital punishment has been a topic of interest for decades and religion has played a very important role in determining whether death penalty should be abolished or not. The death penalty was originally intended as an affirmation of the moral order and a way to set an example for the public of which behavior was outlawed and which was acceptable. However, recent years have changed the narrative surrounding the penalty, and many countries have taken steps to outlaw it while others are still using it (Hood & Hoyle, 2009). The latter group usually justify the death penalty with religious ordinances and laws. The essay aims to trace the development of the death penalty and understand the link between it and religion, essentially establishing that religion is consequential in determining the existence of the death penalty. That link does not just exist between laws and religion, but also juries and the decision making in criminal trials: those with religious tendencies are much more likely to support the death penalty in juries.

            The abolition of the death penalty was very rare from 1863 to 1962, and only eight states abolished during those years, along with an ordinary arbitration (Mathias, 2013). By 1975, six more countries had abolished it and an additional 15 by 1986 (Mathias, 2013). Between 1987 and 1991, awareness of the harms of the death penalty spread rapidly and 18 countries completely abolished the crime (Mathias, 2013). The 1990s again saw a general trend for abolishing the penalty, and that has only risen since (Mathias, 2013).

            Currently, over half of the countries in the world have abolished the death penalty, either by directly abolishing the penalty or by not ordering executions despite the existence of the penalty in law (Alarid & Wang, 2001). It was also reported that public support for the death penalty had dropped drastically and is dropping even more in recent years (Alarid & Wang, 2001). In situations where respondents were given other options, they were even less likely to go for the option of the death penalty (Alarid & Wang, 2001). Imprisonment for life is a popular alternative choice in that regard (Alarid & Wang, 2001).

            Western Europe, Australia, and New Zealand along with South African countries are known to be more vocally opposed to the death penalty, where the US until very recently was under the group of countries criticized for its use of the punishments (Alarid & Wang, 2001). Countries in North and South America along with Eastern Europe are generally supportive of the penalty, whereas countries like China, Japan, and Taiwan actively use the penalty as part of their legal instrument even today (Alarid & Wang, 2001).

International

            In recent years, non-governmental organizations have been very vocal in creating an opposition to the death penalty and make that opposition an integral part of human rights (Mathias, 2013). Amnesty International is an example of such an NGO and establishes the death penalty as a violation of human rights and murder ordained by the state (Mathias, 2013). Amnesty International also established that the death penalty is a violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Mathias, 2013).

            These opinions are an extension of the disregard for the death penalty that has existed since the latter part of the 20th century. As the attitudes towards the sanctity of human life changed, so did the opinions about state-ordained murder based on state-ordained rules and regulations. Additionally, it became a jarring reality that the death penalty was not used as efficiently as the name suggests, but that a very naturally subjective judge, jury and legal team decided the fate of everyone killed by it. That created an awareness for the potential victims of the penalty, and along with the explosion of attention towards human rights in the late 20th century in general, that sparked a worldwide abolition trend.

            That trend also brought up the fact that in many cases, the instrument of the death penalty itself and the decisions made in regards to it was often influenced by subtle and subjective factors such as religion and personal beliefs, especially those revolving around life and death.

Religion and Death Penalty

            Religion plays a huge part in the death penalty because of its capacity to interpret the moral sphere and how life and death are linked to religion as well. In some instances, the link to religion in the penal code is intentional, and in others, it is not, but the influence is still clearly there.

            One study investigated the personal characteristics of people who prefer the death penalty versus those that do not agree with it, and it revealed that people with belief in God, in literal interpretation of the Bible and with a position in their specific religious groups had very different perceptions from those that did not have those have these things (Miller & Hayward, 2008). These relationships existed even after jurors were qualified, and in addition to the aforementioned factors, fundamentalism also affected the perception of the death penalty and the comfort with invoking it (Miller & Hayward, 2008).

            Another study revealed that there is a link between religious belief and people that are in favor of the death penalty, in that male Protestants were the most comfortable with the penalty and others felt that they were not in the position to decide for or against someone else’s life (Mathias, 2013). Yet another study concluded that there is a link between the institutionalization of human rights in a country with the predominant religion (Alarid & Wang, 2001). More specifically, Catholic nation-states are likely to abolish the death penalty, and Muslim states are the least likely to abolish it (Mulligan, 2006).

            Muslim states are likely to place emphasis on the ’community of believers’ which is the predominant form of social organization and establishes the needs of the community much more over the need of the individual (Mathias, 2013). That means that any individual rights of a member of the community are not valued as much as the well-being of the community. That essentially creates a tendency towards the death penalty as anyone that harms the community is likely to be forsaken to set an example for the rest of the community and to remove any harm whatsoever that could accrue from that person to everyone around them.

            In addition, Sharia law is explicitly in favor of the death penalty, and it is currently in active use as a legal punishment for a number of crimes in Islamic nations (Mathias, 2013). That is not to say that all Islamic nations are by extension supporters of the death penalty or that all Islamic nations that do use the death penalty apply it in the exact same way (Mathias, 2013). Regardless, Islamic law in and of itself does not say anything against the death penalty and is, in fact, supportive of the idea that those that bring harm to the community should be removed from it for the good of the whole community.

Christianity

            Over the years, Catholicism has had a varied relationship with the death penalty, but the Vatican did abolish the penalty in 1969, which is not necessarily supportive of church belief (Mathias, 2013). Regardless, that abolition was extremely politically motivating given the fact of where it came from, and thus it served as a reason for other Catholic nations to also abolish the penalty (Religions - Christianity: Capital punishment, 2009). The decision from the Church also corroborated its stance on abortion, which is that it is not allowed because of the fact that it destroys the sanctity of life. The same principle was then applied to the death penalty, and it was outlawed (Bjarnason & Welch, 2004).

            Protestant states are more likely to be an individualist, according to Weber. That means that the states will follow a system wherein the individual is protected and supported more than any other model of religious belief in the world. Research accordingly shows that same-sex marriage and inculcate rape law reform are Protestant states as well (Religious Views - Death Penalty, n.d.). That establishes that extending that perception to the death penalty means that Protestant countries are most likely to abolish the death penalty of all other religious faiths because of the fact that doing so is what is most advantageous for the individual.

            Buddhist doctrines are generally based around non-violence and compassion for all life, and that is one of the cruxes of the faith as well. According to the teachings of the religion, individuals are required to refrain from killing or injuring others, which creates a social precedent for what people should or should not do in case they find themselves on a jury (Religious Views - Death Penalty, n.d.). However, Buddhist monks are required to stay out of politics and restrict their political involvement as much as possible, which means that the instructions set by Buddhists for their population are not necessarily translated into law and legislation. That is one of the rarer situations, as usually the fundamental religion in any country also legislates for the population.

            Despite the decrees in Buddhism, there is obviously a history of not just involvement in laws and politics by Buddhist monks but also in support for violence and retribution in South East Asian countries that are under Buddhist influence (Religious Views - Death Penalty, n.d.). It is also important to remember that some South Asian countries were practicing the death penalty much earlier than the inception of Buddhism in India in 400 to 500 BC and that cultural and historical factors have just as much of an influence on legislation.

            Hinduism is conflicted on the issue of the death penalty, and in many cases gives the ruler of the time the discretion to make the decision about whether it should be invoked or not (Religious Views - Death Penalty, n.d.). During the times of the subcontinent, the Maharajas did not usually invoke the penalty at all because they believed their job had more to do with mercy and informing people. In addition, there are many instances of the saints even addressing criminals directly to reform them and would change them so as to get them pardoned from the death penalty. In some instances, those people are reported even to have become saints themselves due to the influence of the attempts at reform.

            The Old Testament of Judaism has an extensive list of 36 capital crimes that are totally outlaws in the eyes of the Jewish population, which creates the perception that the religion as a whole is totally in support of the death penalty. However, that is not entirely true, especially when contextualized with the history of the application by Jewish courts and countries where Judaism is the predominant religion. When Jewish law was both the secular and religious law, courts rarely applied the penalty and usually would give serious criminals an alternative punishment (Religious Views - Death Penalty, n.d.). Additionally, the state of Israel abolished the death penalty in 1954 for any and every crime that a person could be tried over. That solely had the exception of those who committed Nazi war crimes, and only one person was executed in Israel, and that was Adolf Eichman, a Nazi war criminal who had a huge part to play in the Holocaust.

            That understanding of Jewish law and regulations is understood not through the Torah by itself but also the Talmud which is an elaborate explanation of the laws that Judaism defines for its followers. The rabbis that created that interpretive text did not explicitly outlaw the death penalty but set up a number of barricades that make it very difficult for any crime to reach that level of seriousness (Erasmus, 2015). That meant that in practicality, it would be very difficult for anyone to be punished by death over any crime under Jewish law.

Fundamentalism

            Fundamentalism is a belief in free will and personal responsibility, as well as in the staunch application of religion laws. It is generally inculcated into people due to their socialization, which makes it doubly important to regard in any calculation of the link between religion and the death penalty, but also doubly hard to rise up and out of. In comparison to fundamentalism, religious behaviors are more personally dictated and therefore changeable, and also more noticeable from the devotional component of the daily routine (Young, 1992). A way to spot fundamentalism is an intense dedication to fulfilling the requirements of the religion above and beyond what is required and those that are staunch defenders of the tenets of their faith.

            A study concluded that there are some religious characteristics that specifically relate to the death penalty, which means that there are some characteristics that transcend a particular religious belief and derive purely from a strong faith alone. The study said that fundamentalism is one of the main factors in that situation (Miller & Hayward, 2008). Apart from that, the study also specified that literal translators of religious text and those with the belief in God’s aim for retribution and extermination of harmful societal elements are also more likely to favor the death penalty (Miller & Hayward 2008). Apart from these religious factors, gender and doubt about the law also have a very significant impact.

The study, therefore, showcases that fundamentalism is defining not just for personal decisions, but also for decisions that a person makes that can affect others. That is contextualized when one thinks of a fundamentalist person being part of a jury or being part of any law-making instrument in the state. Due to their literal and staunch dedication to the application of religious tenets, these people are much less likely to forego criminals for any concern over human rights. It is also relevant to note here that while almost all other denominations of the population are likely to have some kind of doubt about the application of the death penalty, that group is the most likely to be staunchly in favor of it if they think that is what their religion decrees (Religion and the Death Penalty, 2018). Having established all of that, it is not surprising that fundamentalists support the death penalty, believing that those that have done something from their free will should be held responsible for their actions.

            Religion has an undeniable impact on state laws and on the mindsets of its population. One of the most internationally and historically contested laws is the death penalty, which is proven to be derived from and subjected to intense religious and spiritual belief. Those agreeing with it do so because of a faith in the community over the individual and those disagreeing with it do so because of the sanctity of human life which they do not feel the state has any control or legislation over. Regardless of the opinions on the matter, that essay has conclusively shown the relationship between all major religions that are influencing and shaping laws today and the death penalty, additionally deriving a relationship between fundamentalism and the death penalty as well.

Alarid, L., & Wang, H. (2001). Mercy and Punishment: Buddhism and the Death Penalty. Social

Justice, 28(1), 231-247. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/29768067

Bjarnason, T., & Welch, M. (2004). Father Knows Best: Parishes, Priests, and American

Catholic Parishioners’ Attitudes toward Capital Punishment. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 43(1), 103-118. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1387776

Erasmus (2015, May 23). Thou shalt not kill. Retrieved from             https://www.economist.com/erasmus/2015/05/23/thou-shalt-not-kill

Hood, R., & Hoyle, C. (2009). Abolishing the Death Penalty Worldwide: The Impact of a “New

Dynamic.” Crime and Justice, 38(1), 1-63. doi:10.1086/599200

Mathias, M. (2013). The Sacralization of the Individual: Human Rights and the Abolition of the

Death Penalty. American Journal of Sociology, 118(5), 1246-1283. doi:10.1086/669507

Miller, M., & Hayward, R. (2008). Religious Characteristics and the Death Penalty. Law and

            Human Behavior, 32(2), 113-123. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/25144611

Mulligan, K. (2006). Pope John Paul II and Catholic Opinion Toward the Death Penalty and

            Abortion. Social Science Quarterly,87(3), 739-753. Retrieved from             http://www.jstor.org/stable/42956152

Religion and the Death Penalty (2018). Retrieved from

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=2249

Religions - Christianity: Capital punishment (2009). Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/christianity/christianethics/capitalpunishment_1.s            html

Religious Views - Death Penalty. (n.d.). Retrieved from             https://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.subissues.php?issueID=000191

Young, R. (1992). Religious Orientation, Race, and Support for the Death Penalty. Journal for

the Scientific Study of Religion, 31(1), 76-87. doi:10.2307/1386833

Crime Religion Social Issues

SandyVC has helped me with a case study on special children for my reflective essay. She is a true mind-reader who just knows what to write when you share a little bit. Just share your thoughts and she will catch up right away.

Use this essay example as a template for assignments, a source of information, and to borrow arguments and ideas for your paper. Remember, it is publicly available to other students and search engines, so direct copying may result in plagiarism.

Hire one of our experts to create a completely original paper even in 3 hours !

Related Essays

Gender inequality in the united kingdom.

Women are the cornerstone to the success of any organization, yet the masculine society has devalued their role in the s...

Gender Discrimination in the Workplace

Today, women with a lot of potentials to register great success in the organizations they work constantly face discrimin...

Diversity in Aviation Industry

Ison, D. C., Herron, R., & Weiland, L. (2016). Two decades of progress for minorities in aviation. Journal of Aviati...

Gender Equality in Workplace

Gender inequality is an important issue advanced by feminist groups and individuals, especially in the world that seeks ...

Sex Discrimination in Organizations

Case study 1. The Sex Discrimination (The Case on Daisy, Jenny and Sonia) Description of the Sex Discrimination Directiv...

Gender Discrimination and Employee Performance

Business Problem: Impact of Gender Discrimination on Employee Performance Context of the Problem Discrimination based on...

Similar Categories

Don't plagiarize, order a custom essay instead!

• Terms and Conditions
• Money Back Guarantee
• Cookie Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Buy Dissertation
• Buy Research Paper
• Buy Reaction Paper
• Buy Plagiarism Free Essays
• Do My Homework
• Write My Research Paper
• Write My Thesis
• Write My Assignment
• Write My Lab Report
• Write Papers for Money
• Correct My Essay
• Write My Speech
• APA Paper Writing
• Affordable Essay Writing
• MBA Essay Writing
• Graduate Essay Writing Service
• Research Paper Writing Service
• Research Paper for Sale
• Coursework Writing Service
• Capstone Project Writing Service
• Book Review Writing Service
• Personal Statement Service
• Research Proposal Writing Service
• Literature Review Writing Service
• Academic Ghostwriting Service
• Descriptive Essay Writing Service
• Expository Essay Writing Service
• Analytical Essay Writing Service
• Persuasive Essay Writing Service
• Argumentative Essay Writing Service
• Narrative Essay Writing Service
• Critical Thinking Writing Service
• Scholarship Essay Writing Service
• Law Essay Writing Service
• Nursing Paper Writing Service
• History Essay Writing Service
• Business Essay Writing Service
• Economics Essay Writing Service
• Finance Essay Writing Service
• Psychology Essay Writing Service
• Philosophy Paper Writing Service
• Chemistry Homework Help Service