1. Identify any role-specific obligations involved with the death penalty. • When it comes to the death penalty and identifying any role-specific obligations involved with the death penalty a few that come to mind are: the friends and family who care about the victim, loved ones of the persecuted, the executioner to the person(s) on trial as well as the inmates. 2. How might a utilitarian argue in favor of the death penalty? How might a utilitarian argue against the death penalty? In other words, think about the benefits and harms involved, and explain how we might weigh the benefits and harms against one another to produce the greatest sum total of happiness/good in society. • A utilitarian might react to the death penalty when in favor of it with “an eye for an eye” it is fair and just. The …show more content…
What concerns might we have about fairness and justice in thinking about the death penalty? • If two people committed same crime and one got the death penalty and the other didn’t, that means that the person died arbitrarily. This does unfortunately happen do to racial, gender, disability, prosecutorial discretion, and when poverty disparities are present. • Sadly, in my life I have seen and been a part of incidents where the wrong person was blamed. As I was heading to a Birthday dinner with a few friends, a woman, not a part of our group ran up and started hitting one of my male friends. I called 911 and when they arrived they didn’t even question the woman, instead they came straight to him asking what he did to her… this was a gender discrimination, I was scared and worried for my friend as he had done nothing wrong but the way the police conducted themselves towards him who horrible. 4. Is anyone’s autonomy at stake in this issue? Are any rights being violated, or liberties being limited? If we need to limit anyone’s autonomy, do we have sufficient justification for doing so? Here, ask yourself whether Kant’s principle of humanity applies to the death