A step… and a slope

By Fr Stephan Alexander

General Manager, CCSJ and AMMR

The Catholic Church teaches that every human life, without exception, has an inherent dignity because it is created in the image and likeness of God (Gen 1:27). This dignity is not earned, nor can it be lost by sin, crime, or social status. It is a truth that shapes how we view justice, public safety, and the use of force.

When governments or societies begin to act in ways that diminish this sacred value, we risk stepping onto what philosophers call a “slippery slope”, a process where one decision leads to another.

It may appear reasonable at first, but it gradually leads to outcomes that are harmful, unjust, and often far removed from the original intent. In moral philosophy, this slope is dangerous because it erodes principles quietly and progressively, often without us realising how far we have drifted.

Recently, national conversations have centred on measures to address violent crime: the possible resumption of hangings, the introduction of stand-your-ground legislation, and even public praise for the killing of suspected criminals. Each of these is being proposed or considered as a means of deterrence to send the message that crime will meet the strongest possible response.

For clarity, stand-your-ground provisions generally remove the legal duty to retreat when threatened. In situations where a person fears death or serious injury, they may use force, including deadly force, to defend themselves, even if a safe escape is possible. While the intention is to protect law-abiding citizens, such laws also widen the circumstances in which lethal force is seen as justified.

From a Catholic perspective, these approaches raise serious ethical concerns, not simply because of what they do in the moment, but because of what they make possible in the future. Here is where the slippery slope emerges.

If we begin to treat the taking of human life as an acceptable, even admirable, solution to certain crimes, we may unintentionally start reshaping the moral instincts of our society.

Today, it may be the execution of a convicted murderer or the shooting of a home invader. Tomorrow, it may become the routine killing of those merely suspected of wrongdoing.

What begins as lawful execution can, in time, desensitise us to extrajudicial killings—by police officers, armed forces, or vigilantes—because the line between ‘justice’ and ‘retribution’ becomes blurred.

If the killing of wrongdoers is celebrated, it risks becoming a social norm, rather than a tragic last resort. This subtle shift can lead to retaliatory killings, a lack of reasonable force in defending oneself from attack, the misuse of deadly force in neighbourhood disputes, and even State-sanctioned operations that bypass due process altogether.

Consistent ethic of life

History shows that once society accepts the principle that some lives are less worthy of protection, that principle can be extended far beyond its original scope. The logic used to justify the execution of dangerous criminals could, in future generations, be used to defend the destruction of other vulnerable lives.

If dignity depends on perceived usefulness, innocence, or compliance, then unborn children, the elderly, the sick, and the disabled are placed at risk.

This is why the Church teaches a consistent ethic of life. Pope St John Paul II, in Evangelium Vitae, warned that the death penalty, abortion, and euthanasia are not isolated issues but connected threats to the “culture of life”.

When respect for life is weakened in one area, the whole foundation is weakened. We cannot hope to defend the unborn if we accept the unnecessary killing of the guilty. We cannot protect the elderly if we cheer the violent death of suspected wrongdoers.

The slippery slope here is not just legal; it is moral and cultural. As St Thomas Aquinas observed, law has a teaching function; it shapes the conscience of the people.

If our laws and leaders communicate that lethal force is a first resort rather than a last resort, we are teaching our society that human life is negotiable. That is a lesson we cannot afford to pass on.

This does not mean ignoring the very real suffering caused by violent crime. Our faith prioritises the formation of consciences. Our first course of action is always to teach people to respect life—to live good lives. We must return to this priority at all levels of society, especially in our homes and schools.

Our faith also calls us to stand with victims, to uphold justice, and to protect the innocent. But in doing so, we must choose means that honour life, not erode it. True justice punishes wrongdoing without compromising the dignity of the wrongdoer. True safety is built not only on deterrence but also on the cultivation of respect, reconciliation, and peace.

In practical terms, this means strengthening law enforcement in ways that respect due process, investing in prevention, rehabilitation, and community transformation, and ensuring that our justice system is both firm and humane.

It also means guarding our hearts against the temptation to dehumanise those who have done wrong, for as Christ reminds us, “Whatever you did to the least of these, you did to me” (Mt 25:40).

The slippery slope is real. The choice before us is whether we will stand at the top, guarding the dignity of every human life, or take the first steps downward, hoping that we can stop ourselves before we reach the bottom.

Our faith, our humanity, and our history all counsel the same wisdom: do not step onto that slope.

The CCSJ asks for your support. Please donate:

Catholic Commission for Social Justice

Account #: 290 458 025 501

Bank: Republic Bank Ltd.

or you can contact us at: admin.ccsj@catholictt.org