However, much has happened since it went up, including the Blogger outage. Scroll down for a report on that. More new posts will be added below this one.
Inthe United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which is a pledge among nations to promote fundamental rights as the foundation of freedom, justice, and peace in the world.
The political elite in Europe often condemn the US as human rights violators since we still use the death penalty on murderers, which they insist is a violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. But they couldn't be more wrong.
Abolitionists interpret from Article 3 in that Declaration to proclaim each person's right to protection from deprivation of life, especially murderers! And they also point to Article 5, which states that no one shall be subjected to cruel or degrading punishment.
From this, abolitinists self-righteously declare that the death penalty violates both of these rights. But in fact, nowhere in that declaration is the DP specifically condemned as a human rights violation! For instance, in Article 3 it states: Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Strangely, from this, abolitionists interpret that the death penalty is a human rights violation since it deprives a person's right to life.
But if we were to follow that reasoning, we would have to abolish prisons as a human rights violation as well since they deprive people of liberty. We would also have to abolish charging taxes and fines since they violate one's "security of person.
So the interpretation that abolitionists derive from Article 3 of the Declaration is illogical and contradictory. And in Article 5, it states: No one shall be subjected to cruel or degrading punishment.
From this, abolitionists insist that capital punishment is ruled out because it is "the ultimate cruel, inhuman, and degrading punishment.
Indeed, what is stated in Article 5 is highly subjective and open to interpretation and could just as easily be applied to prisons as well.
And at the time it was implemented, most nations who signed it had the had the death penalty and continued to use it long after the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was approved by them. So obviously, the signers back then had the moral coherence to appreciate the distinction between murders and executions.
What the DP is, is a punishment for a human rights violation, not a human rights violation itself. Anyone with any amount of moral judgment and coherence would recognize and respect that difference.
All abolitionists are trying to do is protect human rights violators at the expense of their victims by trying to pass off the just punishment of human rights violations as a human rights violation itself, an analysis that one would have to be totally lacking in sound moral judgement to accept since it is so obviously contradictory as well as morally and logically skewed.On June 26, , the US Supreme Court ruled that gay marriage is a right protected by the US Constitution in all 50 states.
Prior to their decision, same-sex marriage was already legal in 37 states and Washington DC, but was banned in the remaining The Controversial Issue Of Juvenile Incarceration - Regardless of the global consensus that children or juveniles cannot be held to the same levels of responsibility as grownups, the United States has continued to punish children as if they are adults.
46 The Death Penalty vs. Life Incarceration: A Financial Analysis. By Torin McFarland, Class of ABSTRACT In the 32 states in the Union where the death penalty. 🔥Citing and more!
Add citations directly into your paper, Check for unintentional plagiarism and check for writing mistakes. What makes the matter worse is that incarceration has done Continue reading › Persuasive Essay on Death Penalty: Pros and Cons.
By Lauren Bradshaw. March 31, Example Essays. Common dissertations written by students take the form of persuasive essay on death penalty: the pros and cons.
The latest breaking news video and visual storytelling from HuffPost.