There are opponents who absolutely disagree with capital punishment.

Does not the current Catechism posit that, as a practical matter, the only time the death penalty is permissible is when it is the only viable option to prevent the person from harming others? If so then how are the two situations presented above any different from self defense, military action or police action? Is it because you don’t really believe a circumstance could ever arise in the future where the imposing death penalty may in fact really be the only viable option to prevent the criminal from committing future harm? Or is it because you the prospective harm is not quite “imminent” enough to justify the death penalty?

In the United States only 38 states have capital punishment statutes.

why are we the only first world country that still has capital punishment.

Pataki and “The Death Penalty Should Not Be Abolished,” by David B.

What we need, it seems to me (and I am a nobody) it to get the world’s governments to accept the current teaching of the Church on the death penalty. If we could do that, then the death penalty would be practically non-existent. I believe it will be more difficult – not less – to get secular governments to accept a blanket “never.”

In the article titled “Does Death Penalty Save Lives.

My point is simply this: the current Catechism seems to appropriately address all these issues. There does not seem to be a pressing need to change the Church’s teaching on the death penalty. It seems imprudent to me to lay down a blanket prohibition since the Church has explicitly acknowledged that the death penalty maybe legitimately in the past (overturning this, in my view, risks the credibility of the Church) and since it is possible that societal conditions may exist somewhere in the world – either now or in the future – that would make such a blanket rule both practically untenable and highly unlikely to be accepted.

“Legalized Murder: The Death Penalty Serves Revenge and Does Nothing to Solve Crime,” by Michael J.

Edward Feser on Pope Francis’ recent statements on capital punishment

The resumption of capital punishment after a long moratorium, which began in 1967, is the result of a series of decisions by the United States Supreme Court. In the first of these decisions, Furman v. Georgia (1972), the Court held that the death penalty as then administered did constitute cruel and unusual punishment and so was contrary to the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution. Subsequently in 1976 the Court upheld death sentences imposed under state statutes which had been revised by state legislatures in the hope of meeting the Court's requirement that the death penalty not be imposed arbitrarily. These cases and the ensuing revision of state and federal statutes gave rise to extended public debate over the necessity and advisability of retaining the death penalty. We should note that much of this debate was carried on in a time of intense public concern over crime and violence. For instance, in 1976 alone, over 18,000 people were murder ed in the United States. Criticism of the inadequacies of the criminal justice system has been widespread, even while spectacular crimes have spread fear and alarm, particularly in urban areas. All these factors make it particularly necessary that Christians form their views on this difficult matter in a prayerful and reflective way and that they show a respect and concern for the rights of all.

The death penalty is hypocritical; it condemns killing by killing people.

The prescribes the death penalty for a great many violations of law.

Given the express authorisation of capital punishment at Genesis 9:6 and of our Lord’s express confirmation of the entire Torah at Matthew 5:18, it is impossible to entertain the proposition that the death penalty is contrary to the Gospel unless one could point to any subsequent declaration of His, expressly referencing Genesis 9:6 and revoking the power it confers.

The public has, for many years, been in favor of this few and pro-death penalty.

Bishops' Statement on Capital Punishment, 1980

for capital punishment provides the murderer with incentive to repentance which the ordinary man does not have, that is a definite date on which he is to meet his God.

It is a question most people have the answer for when it comes to capital punishment.

The Pros and Cons of Capital Punishment « Phil for …

In 1974, out of a commitment to the value and dignity of human life, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, by a substantial majority, voted to declare its opposition to capital punishment. As a former president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops pointed out in 1977, the issue of capital punishment involves both "profound legal and political questions" as well as "important moral and religious issues." And so we find that this issue continues to provoke public controversy and to raise moral questions that trouble many. This is particularly true in the aftermath of widely publicized executions in Utah and Florida and as a result of public realization that there are now over 500 persons awaiting execution in various prisons in our country.