Class writings
Sep. 28th, 2006 10:44 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
major_kerinaSomething I wrote for class. A thesis statement followed by an analysis.
Thesis - The death penalty should be abolished because, combined with errors and bias in the justice system, it poses too high a risk of executing innocent people.
Toulmin Method Analysis of “Execution Are Too Costly-Morally” by Helen Prejean
The Claim: The death penalty costs humanity and our country too much in the way of our principles of human rights and democracy.
Grounds:
One - Arguments for the historical use of punishment are flawed because they pick and choose which crimes are worthy of death and arbitrarily ignore others.
Two - Early Christians were specifically against the use of violence for punishment until the 5th century with St. Augustine.
Three - The closed-door, hidden procedure of an execution adds an impersonality by which the public at large isn’t emotionally-connected and is more willing to allow it to continue.
Four - Having the death penalty renders America barbaric in the eyes of the world.
Warrant
One - ‘Eye for an eye’ doesn’t work because it is a notion which is a part of a specific historical time when punishment by death was given for adultery.
Two - Violence is not a part of the ethical crux or intent of Jesus’s teachings. It came latter, as the involvement of the Church grew into secular matters.
Three - The morality of the country sends an important message to the rest of the world, especially if we intend to be a beacon for democracy.
Four - If people witnessed public executions, their joking and nonchalance about the act would vanish.
Backing: She assumes that everyone will agree that the Bible is a framework and basis for moral structures in society. She also assumes that there exists a moral structure for human beings and that the government can’t violate the individualist dignity of its citizens.
Modal Qualifiers:
Prejean notes that while “eye for an eye, life for life” comes from a tribal system where rules that assuaged retaliation by tribes were necessary. She says it is, “abundantly clear that the bible depicts murder as a crime for which death is considered the appropriate punishment”. But she notes for the crimes for which murder is on an equal foot “no person of common sense would dream of appropriating such a moral code today” for the punishment of these offences. She claims that “biblical quarterbacking” has diminished the nuances to what theBible says is right and proper punishment for particular crimes.
Rebuttals:
Objections: The bible supports death penalty, with the quote “eye for an eye”.
Rebuttal: The quote is often taken out of textual context wherein it applied to a pregnant woman and out of historical context wherein tribes dealt with the wilderness with no organized civic systems.
Objections: Jesus would’ve supported capital punishment.
Rebuttal: The Gospels are full of compassion for sinners instead of punishment and the early Church turned away from capital punishment and violence for perceived wickedness. It didn’t emerge until later.
Objections: The public isn’t bothered by having criminals executed.
Rebuttal: The public doesn’t witness them being killed so there’s no emotional attachment to the act. It’s like pushing a button. Executions in view of public, like in the Old West, would prompt stronger reactions in modern society.
Objections: The rest of the world is a much more violent place than America.Rebuttal: Most of the world has outlawed the death penalty and as a supposed beacon of democracy to the world, why shouldn't America be held a higher standard than the rest of the world?
Thesis - The death penalty should be abolished because, combined with errors and bias in the justice system, it poses too high a risk of executing innocent people.
Toulmin Method Analysis of “Execution Are Too Costly-Morally” by Helen Prejean
The Claim: The death penalty costs humanity and our country too much in the way of our principles of human rights and democracy.
Grounds:
One - Arguments for the historical use of punishment are flawed because they pick and choose which crimes are worthy of death and arbitrarily ignore others.
Two - Early Christians were specifically against the use of violence for punishment until the 5th century with St. Augustine.
Three - The closed-door, hidden procedure of an execution adds an impersonality by which the public at large isn’t emotionally-connected and is more willing to allow it to continue.
Four - Having the death penalty renders America barbaric in the eyes of the world.
Warrant
One - ‘Eye for an eye’ doesn’t work because it is a notion which is a part of a specific historical time when punishment by death was given for adultery.
Two - Violence is not a part of the ethical crux or intent of Jesus’s teachings. It came latter, as the involvement of the Church grew into secular matters.
Three - The morality of the country sends an important message to the rest of the world, especially if we intend to be a beacon for democracy.
Four - If people witnessed public executions, their joking and nonchalance about the act would vanish.
Backing: She assumes that everyone will agree that the Bible is a framework and basis for moral structures in society. She also assumes that there exists a moral structure for human beings and that the government can’t violate the individualist dignity of its citizens.
Modal Qualifiers:
Prejean notes that while “eye for an eye, life for life” comes from a tribal system where rules that assuaged retaliation by tribes were necessary. She says it is, “abundantly clear that the bible depicts murder as a crime for which death is considered the appropriate punishment”. But she notes for the crimes for which murder is on an equal foot “no person of common sense would dream of appropriating such a moral code today” for the punishment of these offences. She claims that “biblical quarterbacking” has diminished the nuances to what theBible says is right and proper punishment for particular crimes.
Rebuttals:
Objections: The bible supports death penalty, with the quote “eye for an eye”.
Rebuttal: The quote is often taken out of textual context wherein it applied to a pregnant woman and out of historical context wherein tribes dealt with the wilderness with no organized civic systems.
Objections: Jesus would’ve supported capital punishment.
Rebuttal: The Gospels are full of compassion for sinners instead of punishment and the early Church turned away from capital punishment and violence for perceived wickedness. It didn’t emerge until later.
Objections: The public isn’t bothered by having criminals executed.
Rebuttal: The public doesn’t witness them being killed so there’s no emotional attachment to the act. It’s like pushing a button. Executions in view of public, like in the Old West, would prompt stronger reactions in modern society.
Objections: The rest of the world is a much more violent place than America.Rebuttal: Most of the world has outlawed the death penalty and as a supposed beacon of democracy to the world, why shouldn't America be held a higher standard than the rest of the world?
