Igor Primoratz's A Life For A Life

The topic I will be using is "A life for a life" by Igor Primoratz. Primoratz argues that death penalties for someone's crime is morally justifiable. He has research thoroughly on how people would say that death penalty violates a right of life, and that it promotes logical inconsistency, judicial errors, disproportionate application for poor and minorities, and he had also have a counter argument for each of the followings. He believes that the more severe a crime a person does, the more severe the punishment should be, the less severe a crime is, the less severe the punishment should be. An example would be say a man had raped a women, when he is caught for his action and punished for it, he would be raped for his crime. That is just morally

He believes that all lives are equally valuable and that we should reform our justice system, but not give up the death penalty. He had six objections, a right to life, a contradiction objection, two lack of proportionality objections, an unpreventable error, and a biased prejudice. The right to life opposition is the capital punishment and that it is moral because it violates the right to life of the person being executed. Even though he/she had murdered someone their life has value as well, and they have the right to life no matter what. Primoratz responses to "the right to life" objection are that rights are not absolute. The contradiction object is a legal system that includes capital punishment is contradictory, and his response to it is that is that he assumes that when the government executes a criminal, it is either unjustified killing or murder. The first lack of proportionality objection is when execution fails to accomplish the retributivist objective of proportionality between the crime and the punishment because he believes that no two lives are equally valuable. I think that all life including, animals, bugs, sea creatures, and humans have a part and play in life, and that they are all valuable. Igor's response to the fundamental lack of proportionality objection is that there are various kinds of factual inequalities among people but all humans are equal from an ethical perspective. The second lack of proportionality objection is that not an argument against the death penalty principle only an objection to a particular set of institutional procedures. The unpreventable error complaint is when errors are unpreventable and once a sentence is carried out it is not able to go back. Igor Primoratz response to the unpreventable error object is that they failing to apply the death penalty to the criminals because of concerns about