Poena Mortis Death Penalty Analysis

Confucius once said, “When a country is well governed, poverty and a mean condition are something to be ashamed of. When a country is ill governed, riches and honors are something to be ashamed of.” Proverbs 28:2 also declaratively stated that “When a country is rebellious, it has many rulers, but a ruler with discernment and knowledge maintains order.” This two wise quotes proves that to have a peaceful country is to have better rulers and laws first. If rules are disobeyed, then consequently equal consequences should be given to the violator. These penalties are included in the laws of a community. One of these penalties is the poena mortis, or death penalty for narcotic producers. Narcotics have troubled the world and its youth generation, and many countries have prohibit its usage and production. In response to these actions, countries created death penalties for these drug producers. However, death penalty is a cruel and harsh consequence for narcotic producers, and it is unsuitable for them. Death penalties have created a lot of conflicts between the government side and the contra side, and thus, another penalty should replace this illegitimate punishment. First of all, death penalty triggers hate from the anti-death penalty to the government, rather than just mere deterrence, second, death penalty involves murder and ignores human rights of living and, third, death penalty is not advantaging to anyone. Peter Bregman said “Execution is a people problem, not a strategy problem. The quote proves that death penalty might be appropriate, strategically, however it is socially inappropriate. Thus, death penalty should be replaced with a different legitimate penalty. Foremost, Death penalty gives hate from the anti-death penalty side to the executor. This is proved in an event where the Indonesian government executed several drug distributors. Indonesia was highly rebuked in the UN Council for running a counter to international law. Since then, many countries hated Indonesia for this controversial execution. This affected diplomatic relationships between Indonesia and its neighboring countries. Although death penalty gives deterrence to other people, death penalty could lead to worst problems, socially. To deliver a congruent response between diverse kinds of people and the government, hyper-alignment is necessary and mandatory. However this is not easily done, socially speaking. Also, death penalty might look unfair to the executed ones. Death penalty ignores the humanity of someone. It is done by the government without the agreement of the executed …show more content…
This contradicts the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a book made by the UN, 1948, talking about the very basics of human rights. No human has the rights to take the life of another. The Bible also proves this, specifically in one of the commands in the Ten Commandments, which is the prohibition of murder. The solemn God of the universe commanded humans to not at all, at any case, murder, unless that the murder is done under His command. Death penalty violates God’s commandments, unless God commands it, but has God ever commanded us to execute drug producers? No. Instead, God commanded us to forgive our enemies, and accept them whoever they are. This is a heavy violation. Taking away humans’ lives for their sins is very illogical, both for the human rights of living, socially speaking, and for God’s commandment, biblically speaking. What rights does one have to take