Liberals: How can you justify being both pro-choice and against the death penalty?

Question

I don't understand how you can argue for killing of an unborn child for the sake of a mothers choice, but argue against the killing of a convicted criminal.

The most common answer I have heard is that the criminal may be innocent of the crimes he/she has been convicted of and therefore not deserve the death penalty. But an un-born child has not had a chance to be anything but innocent. I have also heard that the death penalty is cruel an unusual punishment. But partial birth abortions are pretty horrific themselves. I don't understand the situational ethics.

Someone explain this to me.

I'm sorry that you are offended by this question, irockarolex, but I have not asked it a trillion times, nor have I seen an answer for it. Do you have an answer or are you simply going to take a jab at me?

Coragryph, the government doesn't impose the death penalty, a jury does. A jury, possibly with mothers on it. It's ultimately a question of choice isn't it?

Answer 1

The statistics speak for themselves. In 2005 according to the World Almanac, there were 1,500,000+ abortions in the United States reported. That averages out to over 4,000 a day, which is more than the number of troops lost in Iraq, and more than those killed in the WTC attackers. Additionally, tally up the American casualties in EVERY war we've had and it'd still be less than 1,500,000. So imagine in one year having the American Revolution, Civil War, World War One, World War Two, Vietnam War, Korean War (where we actually lost more than in Vietnam), Iraq Wars, and every other war, and squeeze all those casualties into just one year, and you'd still have less than the number of abortions. Also not even 1,500,000 people died from Cancer, Heart Disease, Strokes, and AIDS combined. I could maybe bite my lip and grant that 4,000 may have to happen each year because of severe heath risks to the mother, but 1,500,000 a year is genocide.

Think about it, if you smash an eagle egg you will be put in prison. Eagles are more valuable than human beings apparently, and the eagles don't even pay taxes.

Oddly, I believe it was in Vermont, that they listed -1,000 abortions in 2005. I wondered, "What is a negative-abortion? Does the baby come out and kill the doctor?"

Answer 2

I am against the death penalty as death is not a penalty, it is a part of life that we will all visit. (Plus, against it for many other reasons). I am anti-Abortion and Pro-Choice and people should stop thinking that one can't be both.

If I was a woman, and got pregnant and did not want to be pregnant, I would have to state that the choice would have to be mine regardless of the law. I was around when it was illegal. Abortion was performed in abundance and in many ways and generally accepted as a done deal, where the medical profession would be there for the clean up. I worked in the ER during that period in NYC and we dealt with botched abortions on a DAILY basis. From severe hemorrhaging to ingestion of Ammonia. Making it illegal would just allow the wealthy who could afford a trip to where it is legal and safe, and affect the poor, who would find alternate methods.

We need to educate the young to believe that all life is sacred, (with more than just words) and not just who the courts decide who can live or die, and once we learn a true respect for life, perhaps abortion can dwindle.

P_I_gray: The choice to impose the death penalty is made by the Judge, who is the government. The jury may or may not recommend it. Get your facts right. In a capital case, a jury is preselected to impose the death penalty if required. In this instance, perhaps a jury of 12 (who are pro-choice) sit and judge if one should have an abortion or not? Would that work for you. . .you know. . like stacking the deck?

cainisabl...: I can understand the physical aspect of aborting the birth of a child prior to it developing feelings (a functioning nervous system). As this would seem "Humane". I however, believe "LIFE" began a very long time ago "SOMEHOW and SOMEWHERE", and that anything that puts that process to a halt "in cold blood" is wrong at any point for any reason. Self defense and self preservation is the only exception I take here. Revenge is an act of an unstable mind plagued with unstabled thoughts

Answer 3

Some people believe life begins at birth and that when the soul enters the body. Some people believe life begins when the sperm enters the egg. Nobody knows really so we have to choose what to believe. So long as the choice is caring and thoughtful it is hard to refute it.
So it is possible to believe in the sanctity of human life without believing that it begins each time an egg is fertilized. There is less doubt about the life and soul of a fully grown adult who has sinned and requires forgiveness, not death. God may have been unforgiving in the old testament, but he sent Jesus to tell us that was wrong and to forgive and love. So it is christian to forgive and to not kill. Jesus was himself a victim of capital punishment and he was innocent. How many times should we let that happen again?
I believe that capital punishment can be the best thing in some cases, so I am telling you this just to help you understand that others may have different views from yours and still be OK people. Not because I disagree with your feelings or logic.
Maybe some should be killed and others forgiven. It takes a system that is "Just" to sort them out and our system is lacking.
So perhaps it is better to err on the side of caution. ( let them live until God takes them) God can punish the killers in the afterlife if they need it. He does not need us to do it for him. He has condemned us all to die anyway.
I do insist that convicted killers be kept away from society .

The abortion thing is not as simple as you think nor is it really that important in the long run. It serves as a distraction in politics to prevent people from being rational and to hate others. do not get sucked in. The next time you get pregnant from a rapist, you may have second thoughts.

Answer 4

Good point.

I'm a social liberal and agree with your point. I am pro-choice AND for the death penalty.

I believe a mothers rights out weigh any rights of the unborn fetus. It is her body and without it the fetus could not survive. It is not like the fetus is a person separate from his or her mother until it is viable (about 30 - 35 weeks). Then it becomes a different matter. In fact I personally think abortion after the first trimester should be illegal.

As far as the death penalty, we are talking about an individual that is completely separate and an entity on-to themselves. They are responsible for their actions and in some cases the death penalty I believe is appropriate.

Answer 5

I'm not a liberal and I don't agree with the comparison.

The Death penalty is served upon a person who has benefited from a public trial with a judge who makes sure that the defendants rights are strictly enforced. He is judged by a jury of his peers and the resulting sentence is automatically reviewed by mandatory appeals.

An abortion is unilaterally implemented on a defenseless and guiltless victim. I do believe that abortion has a place in our society. Those done in the first trimester are not an issue to me. I do have problems with those committed after the first trimester. I think that there should be a legal limitation placed on 2nd trimester abortions based on "need" and it should be documented for regular review by a judicially appointed panel of experts to make sure it is not being abused. I think that 3rd trimester abortions should be banned in all instances when the mother's life is not endangered or the baby is found to have defects that would make it unable to live outside the womb.

How someone can find a comparison between these two actions is a mystery to me.

Answer 6

Very simple. They argue that the government never has the right to decide who lives or who dies.

Pro-choice is about the mother deciding what happens, rather than the govt making the decision for everyone. Same thing for the death penalty versus assisted suicide -- it's about the person being able to choose for themself if they live or die, and the govt not having the right to choose for them (either way).

It's all about the govt's authority to decide life or death for someone else as a matter of law. It's not about the outcome.

Which, by the way, is how many conservatives can be pro-death penalty and anti-choice about abortion and assisted suicide. In both cases, they believe that only the government should be able to make life or death decisions, and never the individual.

{EDIT} Yes, the govt asks the jury if they think the person should die for their crimes. But the govt legislature is the one who decides when the death penalty can be applied, and the govt prosecutor is the one who decides when the death penalty will be sought, and the govt is the one who carries out the sentence. The jury can't impose the death penality without the govt allowing and supporting that decision. And even with the jury, it's still not the person choosing for themself -- it's someone else choosing for them, almost always against their will.

Answer 7

I'm not a liberal. I am pro-choice, but would prefer the mother to find another option (I REALLY wish the pro-lifers would divert their energies into securing adoption as a real choice). And the reason for that is simple; making something illegal does NOT make it go away, and the illegal back alley abortions I feel are FAR more detremental.

I am also pro death penalty, just not under our current system, but that's only because it's broken.

Answer 8

I'm more of a moderate and I do support the death penalty for the most part, but it seems to me this question could be asked in reverse. Why do ultra conservatives support the death penalty but kick about abortion? When does life stop being precious, after we are born? I've wondered about this before, because killing innocent people in war and the death penalty seem to be something ultra-conservatives have no problem with, but protecting zygotes is a huge deal.

Answer 9

I will start by flipping the question- How can conservatives be against killing babies, but for killing people who aren't babies? Is it to OK to kill anyone else if the life of an infant is so precious? Is life in general not precious regardless of what people decide to do with it?

Abortion and the death penalty are two separate issues that cannot be compared. People tend to be less polarized than you think. Just because someone is in favor of keeping abortion legal, that does not necessarily mean that they are saying that every unwanted pregnancy should result in killing it. Secondly, not everyone who claims to be "liberal" is against the death penalty. In fact the death penalty usually has nothing to do with someone's political viewpoint.

Answer 10

I just saw a site that showed the number of abortions performed in a year on average is about 10,000 a year JUST IN ARIZONA!!

Someone should've ran THAT tally the same way the libbies love to tally up the number of dead GIs from Iraq as a point of comparison! It makes you wonder where their heads are at!