Can the death penalty ever be moral?

If you believe as I do, that life is sacred, then can the death penalty ever be morally acceptable? A lot of people would answer "no," but I don't think the answer is that simple. The governor of Massachusetts is trying to find a system which guarantees only the guilty will be executed , but even if you have a perfect system, when is it right to administer the death penalty?

Let me begin by saying that, in general, I oppose the use of the death penalty. My opposition is grounded in the fact that our system of administering capital punishment appears to be deeply flawed, with the ranks of death row populated mostly by people who couldn't successfully find or negotiate a lesser punishment. Actual guilt or innocence seems to have little to do with it, which is bizarre at best, and abhorrent at worst.

I also believe that life is sacred, and that intentionally taking another human life is one of the gravest (pun intended) things anyone can do. In that context, defense against an immediate threat is the only clear moral justification for killing another person or engaging in an armed conflict. Even then, killing or war must be the option of last resort, used only when there is no other effective defense.

Ordinary homicide clearly doesn't reach this moral threshold for capital punishment. Even if the convicted killer is certain to kill again, imprisonment (perhaps in solitary confinement) with no hope of release will effectively remove the threat from society. This has the additional advantages of bring reversible (in case the system made a mistake and convicted an innocent person), and forcing the murderer to endure a lifetime of punishment.

However, there are some rare circumstances where execution is the only way to defend innocent people.

One situation when the killer is likely to serve as an inspiration to others. For example, a political or religious figure whose followers may be inspired by his words or example to kill innocents. Bin Laden, Hitler, and their ilk could pose real problems if imprisoned for long periods of time.

Another is when adequate security can't be ensured, and the killer is likely to cause more harm if he escapes. This might happen, for example, in a war zone, or in an underdeveloped part of the world where the infrastructure simply doesn't exist to reliably lock someone up for decades.

Other than these rare instances, the taking of a life cannot be repaid by the taking of another. By executing a criminal--however heinous his crimes may be--when other effective punishment and isolation options exist, we are simply lowering ourselves to the same moral level as the criminal.