Utilitarian argument supporting your position, including: at least three premises (at least one of which is presсrіptive), alternative actions, all the people affected, all the major effects (including benefits and risks/ costs) and their relative weights (which is the “biggest”), an assessment of the probability / likelihood that the predicted effects will actually occur, and an assessment of the overall utility of each alternative. • Your argument must include at least two relevant, referenced factual claims. All factual claims (desсrіptive &/ or predictive) crucial to your argument must be supported by credible, referenced sources. • At least two clearly identified moral values (“goods”) which underlie your argument 3. Consideration of at least two potential objections (at least one of which is utilitarian, the other could be utilitarian or deontological) to your argument, including: points of common ground (/ shared values) between you and proponents of this objection, and either your refutation of the objection or your revision of your argument to respond to the objection. 4. An annotated bibliography, including entries for at least two sources of credible and pertinent factual information. the moral issue you intend to address: Should capital punishment be outlawed? the position you intend to defend (note – you can still change your position and even your issue after submitting your portfolio) The united states should ban capital punishment. one key factual claim you will use to support your position (ideally, with some indication of how you will support this claim). According to the ACLU research the death penalty has no ″deterrent effect″.
