Verified by 
Punishment
What's Wrong With the Death Penalty?
There are strong arguments against capital punishment.
Posted December 11, 2020 Reviewed by Ekua Hagan
Brandon Bernard was pronounced dead last night at 9:27 p.m., at the Federal Correction Center in Terre Haute, Indiana. Along with four others, he was convicted of killing youth pastors Stacie and Todd Bagley in 1999.
Bernard committed this crime when he was 18. The crime was a terrible one, as the Bagleys were locked in their trunk for hours when Bernard set it on fire with lighter fluid. There is some dispute over whether or not they were already dead, though there is evidence that Todd was already dead while Stacie was not.
Bernard has been remorseful, saying, "I wish that we could all go back and change it. I have tried to be a better person since that day." Todd's mother has forgiven her son's killers.
There are many important details in this particular case that are troubling, strongly calling the justice of such an outcome into question. But I'd like to offer some more general arguments against capital punishment, from an ethical rather than a legal perspective.
There is obviously much more to say here, on all sides of the issue, but given the fact that there have been more federal executions carried out this year than in the previous 56 years combined, and that five more federal executions are scheduled to happen before January 20, I'd like to offer some important arguments against the death penalty.
1. It makes no sense to kill someone for killing someone. Many call into question the logical and moral consistency of ending the life of a human being as punishment for that person ending the life of another human being. There is a moral tension here. We do not subject rapists to rape, those guilty of assault to violent assault, or thieves to theft. But those who make this kind of argument need to address the fact that there may be a relevant difference here, focusing on this question: Is there a morally relevant difference between an act of murder committed by a citizen and an execution committed as punishment by the state? Some say yes, some say no. I think there is a morally relevant difference, but because I think all human life has inherent dignity, I would argue that it is wrong for the state to violate that dignity.
2. The death penalty, as practiced in the United States, is racist. There is a lot of solid data on this point, so I won't offer all of it here. But consider the report released by the Death Penalty Information Center in September of 2020, which reveals the continued presence of discrimination with respect to the death penalty:
- A 2015 meta-analysis of 30 studies showing that the killers of white people were more likely than the killers of Black people to face a capital prosecution.
- A study in North Carolina showing that qualified Black jurors were struck from juries at more than twice the rate of qualified white jurors. As of 2010, 20 percent of those on the state’s death row were sentenced to death by all-white juries.
- Data showing that since executions resumed in 1977, 295 African-American defendants have been executed for interracial murders of white victims, while only 21 white defendants have been executed for interracial murders of African Americans.
- A 2014 mock jury study of more than 500 Californians found white jurors were more likely to sentence poor Latinx defendants to death than poor white defendants.
- Data showing that exonerations of African Americans for murder convictions are 22 percent more likely to be linked to police misconduct.
3. Mistakes are irreversible. The racial bias that continues to exist only underscores the ethical significance of this fact. If the wrong person is in jail for life but is then exonerated, a terrible injustice has occurred. But at least this innocent person can be released and live out the remainder of their days in freedom. No such mitigation is possible, of course, when a person has been wrongly convicted and then put to death.
4. All people have the potential for redemption. The case of Brandon Bernard is but one example of this. There are many others who committed terrible crimes but changed; they became different people with something good to offer the world. Yes, they took away the ability of their victims to do this, and that is a terrible thing. But that fact does not justify doing the same thing again.
Of course, many religious people in America like to quote parts of the Bible to justify the death penalty, such as Genesis 9:6, which states "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." Setting aside the dangers in pulling a Bible verse to justify a practice without regard for the literary, historical, and moral context, those who flock to this text to justify the death penalty in America would do well to also examine the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7), which encourages non-violence and love of one's enemies.
It's hard to square loving someone with executing them. Finally, from this religious perspective, consider the words of the director of the Yale Center for Faith and Culture, Miroslav Volf:
Why am I against capital punishment? Since Christ died for the sin of all, the scandalous and the most beautiful fact is that nobody—absolutely nobody!—is beyond redemption. With capital punishment the state places itself between wrongdoers and God's grace given on the cross.
I cannot imagine losing a loved one due to murder. But I hope that I would have the strength, humility, and love to forgive the murderer, as Todd Begley's mother and so many others have done. Ultimately, forgiveness, humility, love, and the right sort of accountability are redemptive. The claim that violence is redemptive is at best an illusion, and often it is something worse.
