Can Buddhism Tolerate Capital Punishment?

[camerata]

Can Buddhism tolerate capital punishment?

With Thailand having just executed two more prisoners in August (both for drug trafficking), Amnesty International was quick to express its concerns, especially because these came after a six-year hiatus.

"Thailand should follow their example and urgently review its use of the death penalty," Amnesty stated on August 26. "There is no evidence that the death penalty deters crime. The government of Thailand must join the international trend away from capital punishment."

Whether Thais believe Amnesty International or not, everyone should question whether the death penalty is morally justifiable - especially in a country which professes itself to be predominantly Buddhist. Sadly, although there are thousands of Buddhist organisations in Thailand, there is no visible attempt by any of them to even discuss the issue. We should ask if true Buddhists can really reconcile themselves with state-endorsed execution or not. The answer may be clear: That capital punishment is a reminder of how Thai society fails to act in the ways it professes to believe in.

Full story.

-- The Nation 22-10-09

[rockyysdt]

Can Buddhism tolerate capital punishment?

The answer may be clear: That capital punishment is a reminder of how Thai society fails to act in the ways it professes to believe in.

Sadly the way most Thais practice Buddhism bears no resemblance to the Buddhas Dhamma.

[phetaroi]

Whether Thais believe Amnesty International or not, everyone should question whether the death penalty is morally justifiable - especially in a country which professes itself to be predominantly Buddhist. Sadly, although there are thousands of Buddhist organisations in Thailand, there is no visible attempt by any of them to even discuss the issue. We should ask if true Buddhists can really reconcile themselves with state-endorsed execution or not. The answer may be clear: That capital punishment is a reminder of how Thai society fails to act in the ways it professes to believe in.

In the context you are placing it, I think it's a much more complex issue.

First, although once sympathetic to AI, like the ACLU (also to which I was once sympathetic), I found that AI often reacts more strongly to the lesser of evils where they can get away with it. For example, I guess I'd attack series human rights violations in China or the Sudan before I would in some western nations. But they often rant and rave as if all of America was a gulag.

Second, I think Thais -- along with the citizens of most countries -- are very good at detaching themselves personally from what the nation does. How many Americans at the time or now did anything about slavery (at least up until the Civil War) or the decimation of the Indian population? Americans were able to distance themselves emotionally and morally from what others and/or their government were doing.

Third, and I am speaking here of death row inmates in the U.S., I think the average anti-death penalty American would quickly change their minds about being against the death penalty if they were locked in a house with 3 death row inmates for a month. These guys are not good guys who made a mistake. Many of them verge on being true evil.

While I am Buddhist, I still believe the use of death penalty should be used very sparingly for a number of reasons. Nevertheless, some of the extreme situations do -- in my view -- justify it.

[rockyysdt]

While I am Buddhist, I still believe the use of death penalty should be used very sparingly for a number of reasons. Nevertheless, some of the extreme situations do -- in my view -- justify it.

The only downside I can see to incarceration for life is the cost, otherwise, isolation serves to protect society.

If you then introduce education, & dare I say Dhamma, to these lifers their lives might move in the right direction.

Apart from cost, I don't think taking their lives really adds value, especially for lighter offences such as trafficking cannabis.

[hansnl]

Thou shalt not kill.

Maybe a very "loaded" collection of words.

However, I agee wholeheartedly with those words.

Not only for people but also for states.

If the state gives itself the right to kill, how can you condemn someone to die if he/she killed too?

There are many examples of people executed by a state, "legally", while later found not guilty at all.

In that case the state committed murder.

Condemned men and women spending years on death row is abhorrent.

Lifelong incarceration is a much better punishment for those deserving maximum punishment.

If someone serving lifetime was condemned falsely, the punishment can be ended.

That cannot be done with the death penalty.

Edited October 23, 2009 by hansnl

[khaowong1]

Camerata, you know as well as I do, that Buddhism supports no killing whatsoever... and you also know that Buddhist monks in Thailand do not get involved with political positions. Thailand calls itself a Buddhist nation, country, just about like the U.S. calls itself a Christian nation. Lip service. Which is pretty evident to see when you view the politicians of either country and the goofy policy's and votes they make... Politics is politics and religion is religion. Do you remember a couple of years ago when they tried to pass a law to make Buddhism the National Religion. Many monks I know put their necks out on this one, and it got them nothing but censure... They won't likely do that again.