Can it be ethically consistant to be "prolife" and Oppose the death penalty?

Question

A mayor candidate says he thinks abortion is murder, ie he is "prolife" for abortion.

This candidate also Opposes the death penalty, based on his own ethics, not due to problems in the court, DNA sampling or whatever.

Regardless of your personal opinion on either, do these positions reconcile consistantly?

In the converse, comment on the ethics of "ProLife" people (on abortion) who support the state right to execute, kill, convicts or prisoners.

Answer 1

those positions are consistent. It would be incongruous to be "prolife" and then support executions.

Answer 2

It's possible to be "Pro Life" and either for or against the Death Penalty consistently.

It is not possible to be "Pro Choice" and oppose the Death Penalty with any consistency.

People who are on Death Row got there through a long and involved process. They've been accused of a crime, they've had an opportunity to present a defense, they've been convicted of that crime, they've had a second trial to present reasons for lesser punishment than death, and they've had appeals.

Aborted fetuses don't get any of that.

Apparently people that hold this illogical combination of views have decided that serial killers are human beings, and there is no act so heinous that can take that humanity away, but that one must cross the magic threshold of birth to become a human in the first place.

Answer 3

I think it is etically consistant, very much so a prolife person who opposes the death penalty does not believe that it is ever right to kill a human. It is also ethically consistant to be prolife and support the death penalty, in this case the person believes its alright to kill a person that has killed somebody else but they dont believe in taking an innocent unborn life that has harmed nobody. So to summarise both of these positions are ethically consistant

Answer 4

A true prolifer opposes abortion....and the death penalty! Both takes life.

The death penalty costs millions in court costs. It is easier, and harsher for the murderer to keep them locked away until they die naturally.

Answer 5

To be "Pro Life" and to "Oppose the death penalty" are consistent positions. It means you think that life should be protected all the time. If he were being inconsistent he would be Pro Life and Support the Death Penalty.

Answer 6

I think so. Pro-life is an abortion issue, no matter what the name implies. Saving innocent unborns is the object.

Death penalty is ridding society of people who have been convicted of certain crimes, under certain conditions of their own doing. This does assume the court system is operating correctly.

Two separate issues I think, and it seems logical to me that you can be pro saving an innocent and con saving a murderer.