Pros And Cons Of Moral Relativism

Words: 1381
Pages: 6

Moral Relativisim:
The Argument Against Capital Punishment

Moral relativism is the idea that no one person is right or wrong and nothing is true or false, there is not a single true moral standard. Moral relativists believe that as humans we should be tolerant of certain behaviors based on the ideas or viewpoint of another person, society, cultural or a historical situation. When is Rome, do as the Romans do. Moral relativism is a viewpoint that if someone believe it, then it is true for them. It would allow all behavior, no matter what rights or rules have been violated, and in turn would ultimately have no consequence. If moral relativism is true then would it be fair to assume that there is no standard level of morality just several different
…show more content…
First, it provides retribution, or a punishment to those that committed the crime. Secondly, it is meant to create a deterrence to hopefully prevent that person or any other person from committing the same crime since the consequence of death is at stake. In reality does capital really accomplish either of these two purposes? With pros and cons to this topic, here are a few reasons why it morally acceptable to argue against the use of capital punishment in this country.

People still die every year from homicide, so the fear of being sentenced to death doesn’t seem to being deterring criminals from committing such horrific crimes. The American Civil Liberties Union (2007) stated, “There is no credible evidence that the death penalty deters crime more effectively long terms of imprisonment and the states that abolished capital punishment show no significant changes in murder rates or crime in general.” Putting a criminal to death, although it teaches them nothing, is morally acceptable because if someone kills another person for fun or out of anger, they must be bad; they must be put to death because they are unable to be rehabilitated. Also, if you do not find it acceptable to kill a human being it is rather hypocritical that in this country, as well as other countries, we commit the same act because the justice system says it is acceptable. If the ultimate goal was to show killing another human being, for whatever reason is not acceptable or legal, then why doesn’t our justice system refuse to take part in committing murder. It will not resurrect the victim and does not necessarily bring closure to those who lost a loved