Hugo Adam Bedau Capital Punishment

785 Words4 Pages
Capital Punishment Hugo Adam Bedau performs an in-depth examination of the morality of capital punishment and determines that reason favors the elimination of the death penalty. Bedau believes that the way any given person views capital punishment says something about how they value human life. Bedau believes that the issue of capital punishment is a complex topic and involves many moral and personal issues. In order to reach a conclusion on the morality of capital punishment, Bedau examines the various arguments for capital punishment (Beauchamp & Regan, 1993). Bedau looks at three theories of capital punishment from the utilitarians, Immanuel Kant, and John Locke. Bedau finds that Kant believes in the idea of an eye for an eye. Kant says that if a person treats another person badly that they themselves also want to be treated badly. So if we in turn treat this person badly, that is the way they want to be treated. There is a bit of the “do onto others” saying that applies with Kant’s reasoning and would be considered retributive. Bedau does not agree with Kant, due to his theory only working when dealing with a rational or sane killer and does not address all of the other complexities that can come into play. Bedau then looks at the utilitarian argument and finds that in the past there has not been a consensus between utilitarians on capital punishment. Finally, Bedau focuses on John Locke and his in-depth study of capital punishment. Bedau finds that Locke’s views are mainly based on the doctrine of natural rights that was mainly utilized in the 18th century. Bedau tells us that natural rights have three elements: natural, universal, and inalienable. Locke tells us that natural rights are forfeitable to punish a crime they committed. Locke believes that punishment is important for two reasons, to protect our society and deter crime. It is
Open Document