As a good Christian I just wanted to know if I was running for office one day or just had to vote for someone. I mean if I'm for the Death Penalty but against abortion am I moral, what if i'm against the Death Penalty but for abortion am I still moral. I was just wondering.
2006-06-28 15:51:41 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
There are alot of good answers why it is and why it isn't moral. But let me also add, do you feel that are justice system is 100% accurate and putting death the right person.
2006-06-30 07:40:19 · update #1
I believe you are being moral..they are two totally different issues to deal with..and both have options and room for opinions..=)
2006-06-28 15:57:44 · answer #1 · answered by *toona* 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
There are a couple of different thoughts on both subjects. First, when does life begin? If life doesn't begin until birth, then you can be pro abortion and anti-death penalty based on the fact that abortion isn't really killing. If you are pro-life and for the death penalty at the same time, the thinking normally comes down to you believing that life begins at conception, and the fact that the criminal choose to harm others, while the child has not violated the rights of others. Two different schools of thought, neither are necessarily wrong. I employ both. I'm pro-choice, in that I don't believe life begins at conception (but I do believe life begins at the point when the child could live outside the womb on its own, which I think it something like 5 months), and I'm pro-death penalty, because I do believe that if you kill another human, you've given up your natural right to life.
I'm not sure how any of those views are wrong, so long as you are consistent in your thinking.
2006-06-28 22:58:39 · answer #2 · answered by rliedtky 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Regarding Bush and Texas executions...
There are roughly about 20 executions every year in the state of Texas before, during and after Bush was governor there. Relating that stat to him is really a weak point.
The death penalty is a law of the state. No one person placed it there. Many Christians are taught to abide by the laws of the land, in addition to following the gospel. So if you're worried about contradicting your values, realize that being against abortion to save life is not even in the same ballpark as punishing a convicted criminal where the penalty fits the crime.
2006-06-28 23:41:24 · answer #3 · answered by C Bass 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe it comes down to human rights. Unborn children are not given rights in this country. Before everyone jumps down my throat, I (being a man), know that abortion has nothing to do with a guy's feelings at all. A baby is only a guy's responsibility when it is born.
As far as the death penalty goes; these are people that have committed the ultimate crimes. They have given up their human rights by most likely ending someone's life. Kind of ironic how people want to save the life of a criminal, but don't give two sh*ts about the life an unborn child might have.
2006-06-28 22:59:04 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
In my opinion the answer is yes. I can't find any common ground between the two.
An unborn baby has not killed, maimed, rapes, sodomized, decapitated, bludgeoned, need I go on.
On the other hand people sentenced to death have killed, maimed, raped, sodomized, decapitated, bludgeoned, and so forth.
Death is the only way to ensure a person does not repeat his crime. Life without parole is a farce. An Airman from George AFB planned and executed his wife in order to collect the life insurance so he could marry this girl friend. He was convicted of first degree murder and sentenced "to life without parole". 16 years later he was released for good behavior. He is free now that's what the system thinks of the safety of the general public. It is a joke and a pile of crap at the same time.
2006-06-28 23:07:01 · answer #5 · answered by gimpalomg 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think one can, because the people who get the death penalty have proved that they don't belong in society. Killing unborn fetuses, who have done nothing wrong except be the object that some people consider worthless, is a completely different matter. AND notice I wrote this without being hateful or spit derogatory titles.
2006-06-28 22:59:24 · answer #6 · answered by Derrick M 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think so, Lets face it, a unborn child has commited no wrong.
A serial killer who has killed many people, possibly by torturing them to death may be deserving of death.
Moral values have roots in religon, and most religions started
out saying a eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.
Which meant justice is equal to the crime.....
2006-06-28 23:06:53 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Actually, most Republicans follow this ironic twist. George W. Bush oversaw the highest number of execusions when he was the governor of Texas, yet he opposes abortion in almost all circumstances. Executions, under him, are fine for the mentally retarded and minors (seriously).
2006-06-28 22:55:16 · answer #8 · answered by mikecs83 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I've always thought that the biggest hypocrits are those that say abortion is legal but you cannot own handguns AND those who say abortion is an abomination but you can carry whatever handgun you choose. Until someone can rectify both illegal abortion and illegal handguns then I find no one I can believe or trust. How is killing one age set wrong but killing another ok?
2006-06-28 22:56:37 · answer #9 · answered by Who cares 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the goverment will say or do anything to pasify the people.ploiticians are paid to do what they are told either for or against they still get paid.morals and values died out because there was not enough money in it.we are on the on set of the new world order because there is a biger profit margin.
2006-06-28 23:13:46 · answer #10 · answered by richard G 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋