Specialisation: Human Rights

The Death Penalty Should Be Abolished as It Is Not an Effective Deterrent and Violates Human Rights

The death penalty issue remains controversial, with both sides of the debate offering informative evidence supporting their stance. While the proponents of its abolition argue that it is a cruel and inhumane punishment, its opponents believe it is necessary to ensure that justice is served to the aggrieved parties. Primarily, the death penalty is essential in the criminal justice system because it deters potential offenders, lowering crime rates. According to Kort-Butler and Ray (2018), offenders are afraid of committing crimes covered under capital punishment because they fear facing the death penalty. The criminal justice system usually undertakes the appropriate legal procedures to find an individual guilty before sentencing. The death penalty is served to people who have committed heinous crimes against humanity to restore law and order and safeguard others, making it a necessary punishment to deter crime and prevent reoccurrence.

The death penalty is vital in deterring crime and making society safer. The threat of execution often makes a significant number of individuals refrain from committing a heinous act that they had otherwise planned. Notably, most acts punishable by death are major crimes against humanity, such as murder, terrorism, and drug trafficking, which adversely impact others. Considering their societal effects, such acts should be prevented at all costs. Destroying or ending the lives of others remains one of the worst crimes, necessitating equal countermeasures against the offenders. Typically, the punishment should ‘fit the crime;’ if someone kills, they too deserve to die. People who have murdered others have given up their human rights, including that of living (Peshkopia & Trahan, 2020). Crimes that violate basic human rights, such as the right to live, are arguably the worst against humanity, necessitating the need to prevent them at all costs. In this regard, enforcing the death penalty ensures that people who plan to murder others are aware of the harsh consequences.

Murderers deserve to die. The death penalty not only deters people from potentially committing heinous crimes but also ensures that murderers are prevented from killing again in either prison or society after serving their sentence. According to Choi et al. (2019), participants of their study supported the death penalty due to retribution. Murders are usually high-emotion cases, often putting the criminal justice system under extensive public scrutiny, with victim advocates crying for justice. Butler and Ray (2018) state that public support for capital punishment is largely symbolic. Those who prefer the death penalty express anger and distrust, while those who prefer other penalties are less trusting and view the death penalty as applied more fairly. For the criminal justice system to function effectively, people must trust it. Consequently, informed public opinion is valuable in guiding government policymaking (Choi et al., 2019). The judiciary should consider people’s opinions regarding legal matters to earn their respect and trust. The popular public opinion regarding court rulings is that punishment should ‘fit the crime.’ Therefore, once the criminal justice system proves beyond reasonable doubt that one is guilty of murder, the individual deserves punishment according to their crimes’ severity.

Opponents of capital punishment argue that it is an ancient vice that states should refrain from practicing in the 21st century. They claim that it is discriminatory against ethnic, religious, linguistic, and racial minorities and the LGBTQ+ community. The nations that practice or threaten to use the death penalty can utilize it in inappropriate endeavors, such as repressing opposition, instilling fear, and undermining human rights (Choi et al., 2019). Considering the issue of potential misuse and the resulting impacts, opponents of capital punishment believe it is not worth the risk. South Korea is an example of a country that previously misused the death penalty, affecting its effectiveness and perception. A history of authoritarian governance in South Korea depicts the improper use of the death penalty to instill fear and punish those against the government (Choi et al., 2019). Countries continue to execute and sentence people daily as punishment for different crimes, some of which should not be criminalized. While some states reserve the death penalty for murder and terrorism-related offenses, others enforce lesser offenses, such as human rights activism. As such, the opponents of the death penalty want it abolished.

Although some people consider the death penalty a cruel, degrading, and inhumane punishment, enforcing it is necessary to deter crime and prevent murders from killing again. Heinous crimes such as terrorism and murder pose a significant threat to the criminal justice system and humanity. Such acts should be condemned and punishable through the toughest possible laws. Furthermore, many people support the enforcement of capital punishment as a measure of deterring future potential offenders. Notably, the death penalty is justified because it deters people from potentially committing heinous crimes and ensures that murderers are prevented from killing again. Even though the opponents of capital punishment argue it is an outdated tool that should be abandoned because of the potential risks of inappropriate utilization, once the criminal justice system proves beyond reasonable doubt that one is guilty of murder, the individual deserves punishment according to their crimes’ severity.

References

Choi, E., Jiang, S., & Lambert, E. G. (2019). Reasons for South Korean attitudes towards the death penalty: Exploring the nexus between strong public support and history of misapplication. International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice, 43(1), 61-76. https://doi.org/10.1080/01924036.2017.1391107

Kort-Butler, L. A., & Ray, C. M. (2018). Public support for the death penalty in a red state: The distrustful, the angry, and the unsure. Punishment & Society, 21(4), 473-495. https://doi.org/10.1177/1462474518795896

Peshkopia, R., & Trahan, A. (2020). Support for the death penalty reinstatement as a protest attitude: The role of political trust. International Criminal Justice Review, 1-12. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1057567720963158

Effects of Feminism in Modern Society

Feminism identifies, promotes, and accomplishes the ideological, fiscal, psychological, and societal equality of men and women. It encompasses a variety of progressive movements, political systems, and philosophies. Feminism’s concept and practice have changed and improved women’s lives in the United States and worldwide (Kaman, 2021). These effects have been profound and long-lasting. Feminism has criticized and attacked social inequities, explored how gender, color, class, way of life, nationality, faith, gender identity, and impairment interact, and brought attention to many other stark examples of oppression and inequality (Kaman, 2021).

Feminism’s impact on contemporary culture has a long history, dating back to when women campaigned for equality with men. Women’s liberation aims to encourage people to advance gender parity and elevate women’s place in society. Emma Watson’s 2014 address to the UN will serve as a contemporary illustration of this campaign (Williams & Durham, 2015). Throughout the 20th century, these initiatives profoundly impacted our current society as well as the lives of several individual women. The results may be observed today, where there is less job discrimination against women, and some even earn more than their male counterparts (Williams & Durham, 2015). Today’s society has undergone more beneficial than bad changes due to feminism.

Not only has feminism sparked a discussion about inequity, but it has also sparked substantial alterations in our society’s social, political, and cultural structure (Williams & Durham, 2015). The campaign had the tools and the drive to make lasting changes thanks to feminism. The freedom to vote, expanded educational opportunities, more fair compensation, the ability to start divorce procedures, access to contraception and abortion, and the ability to have possessions are all part of this transition (Williams & Durham, 2015). The extensive list of accomplishments shows how feminism has influenced all women’s life-size in some way. Feminism has profoundly altered our civilization politically and culturally when compared to then.

Because it derives from and supports historically sound developmental mechanisms and power contexts, feminism is reasonably healthy (Brysk. & Carreño., 2020). In addition to producing equal, modern, and well-run economies that function better across the board regarding social well-being, the product strategies that promote women’s participation also do so. More significant and evenly distributed socio-economic growth is linked to gender parity, improving health care delivery. A more excellent middle and working class, more robust state capacity, and much more drive for political accountability are all related to the shift from patriarchal patterns of social administration toward a more inclusive society (Brysk. & Carreño., 2020). Because of the institutional incentives, lower levels of authority provide to participate in the larger population, the increased engagement, public health, and child welfare receive more funding when women are empowered (Brysk. & Carreño., 2020).

Some of the original principles that feminism was built upon still hold today, despite how society has twisted them. Despite having more equal chances in society, women must not undervalue the value of men and women cooperating to create a functioning society (Kaman, 2021). It is necessary to examine the widely held belief in quotas. The best candidates should be chosen for jobs or college admission, not based on gender. Feminism has been maligned by society as a damaging doctrine because women who don’t want to strive for their approval have used it as an alibi (Kaman, 2021). Men and women must understand that society cannot function without each other.

In a nutshell, feminism has sparked a discussion about inequality and paved the way for political reform, but it also carries a stigmatized worldview that is untrue and demeaning. We have come to understand its significance, thanks to feminism. It embodies fresh starts, in my opinion. As the topic of the discussion, it represents a significant shift and is a revolution that still needs to advance. Despite the impressive results that feminism has had for female issues, I think that more reform is still necessary. Over time, feminism has changed and is still evolving. This is encouraging in and of itself because evolution and change are essential to growth.

References

Brysk., A., & Carreño., M. F. (2020). Why feminism is good for your health. New Security Beat. Retrieved September 7, 2022, from https://www.newsecuritybeat.org/2020/08/feminism-good-health/

Kaman, R. (2021, March 1). Feminism and its impact on women in modern society. Suprabha Publication. Retrieved September 7, 2022, from https://www.academia.edu/45293588/Feminism_and_its_Impact_on_Women_in_the_Modern_Society

Williams, R. M., & Durham, M. G. (2015, February 22). Feminism has had a significant impact on lives and society. Citizen. Retrieved September 7, 2022, from https://www.press-citizen.com/story/opinion/contributors/guest-editorials/2015/02/22/feminism-significant-impacts-lives-society/23769369/

Legalization of Abortion

Abortion is a debate among health specialists across the world. Abortion has led to scientists not coming up with a solution on whether to legalize abortion. Most abortions occur among teenagers, and pregnancies are unexpected. Therefore for teenagers to get rid of unintended pregnancies, they opt to commit abortion. Scientists have discovered that most women get unexpected pregnancies before the age of 45. Abortion appears to be a personal affair because it influences one’s health and lifestyle. The paper below is going to shed light on why religion, political parties and the health fraternity are against abortion.

Christianity does not allow abortion in any way because it is immoral. The Roman Catholic Church they have always maintained that the intentional killing of the unborn baby is wrong in all circumstances. The Roman Catholic Church referred to the book of Genesis (1:27), which explains how God created man in his own image. The Christian religion does not allow abortion and therefore states that if you have an abortion, you are killing the image of God.

Political parties in countries have been at the forefront of the banning of abortion. According to Randolph (2006, PARA 15), the Republican Party does not support the legalization of abortion. The Republicans cite abortion as violating human rights. They also view committing abortion as going against the traditions and morals of society. In this case, abortion lowers the dignity of women in society and therefore is a taboo.

Abortion leads to the death of a woman during the process if not performed well by a doctor. According to (Gerdts et al., 2016), the information was gathered on the death of the women from the files of all states containing the information. The contacts of the women were taken, and when they tried to reach them, their phone numbers were not going through. Their secondary contacts stated that the woman had died. The death certificates of the women were also counter-checked to confirm whether the information relayed was true. The death certificate confirmed that the woman died after performing an abortion. Termination of the fetus before maturity can therefore lead to the death of an individual. This is caused by excessive bleeding during the process and interference of the body organs during termination, depending on the method used.

Abortion leads to the development of haemorrhages in women, according to (Calvert et al., 2018) from the data that was extracted in hospital admissions. The data was collected on those who had a severe condition of haemorrhage. To the study, excessive bleeding in a woman leads to the weakening of the victims.

Women who once engaged in abortion reported life-threatening complications. According to (Gerdts et al., 2016), women had threatening conditions such as eclampsia and postpartum haemorrhage. The women having an abortion did not have these conditions. Women who gave birth suggested the need to reduce physical events for a while at least three times than suggested by the women who received an abortion. In the group of women admitted in the Turnaway Study, of death of a woman was noted. This suggests that abortion causes future effects which are seen during progressive birth.

It is evident that abortion is dangerous to women and leads to complications which lead to death. The complications can either occur during abortion or after abortion when giving birth. Due to the risky dangers of abortion, the government should ban abortion to performed in any case to avoid an increased mortality rate. Specialists should also create awareness among the public and the dangers of engaging in this immoral behavior.

References

Calvert, C., Owolabi, O., Yeung, F., Pittrof, R., Ganatra, B., & Tunçalp, Ö. et al. (2018). The magnitude and severity of abortion-related morbidity in settings with limited access to abortion services: a systematic review and meta-regression.  BMJ Global Health3(3), e000692. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2017-000692

Gerdts, C., Dobkin, L., Foster, D., & Schwarz, E. (2016). Side Effects, Physical Health Consequences, and Mortality Associated with Abortion and Birth after an Unwanted Pregnancy. Women’s Health Issues26(1), 55-59.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.whi.2015.10.001

Joe O’Dea on Abortion — Joe O’Dea For Colorado. Joe O’Dea For Colorado. (2022). Retrieved 1 September 2022, from https://www.joeodea.com/abortion.