inappropriate to try to reform and rehabilitate them to give them the change to let out to the society again because their crimes are so harsh and condemned by the public and the society so that the court decided that the authorities does not have the positive effect to the society by keeping the criminal in the prison, providing them the services with people’s taxes.
Many abolitionists claim that retribution is nothing but revenge; it does not contain any good reason but to avenge. They claim that such retribution does not do any good to the victim or to the criminal. Many abolitionists does argue that capital punishment should be replaced with a life without parole, as such sentence would have exactly same effect to the criminal and the society, nonetheless more ethical and humane. Some extreme supporters for capital punishment claim that they would not like their taxes being used to feed and secure a criminal who ‘deserve to be executed’. Abolitionists also argue that punishing a criminal by killing them does not match with other punishment methods and
…show more content…
The Lambeth Conference of Anglican bishops condemned the death penalty in 1988 and it is still supporting such view. The United Methodist Church and other Methodist church branches condemn capital punishment, standing against the view that retribution and social vengeance justify the death penalty, claiming that the death penalty often discriminate the poor, the uneducated, with mental and emotional illness, and specific ethnic and religious minorities. The General Conference of the United Methodist Church called for its bishop to stand against capital punishment, and in 1991 The Evangelical Lutheran church in America also condemned the punishment. The community of Christ, Mennonites, Church of Brethren and Friends and Church of Scotland also strongly condemns the punishment under any