If the answer tends to be yes, than I shall count this as irony number 2.
2006-11-25 01:00:06 · 12 answers · asked by Jor 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Well. I'm pro-choice and pro death penalty. I agree fully with the inconsistency posed in your question. I feel the same way about those who are pro choice and anti death penalty. There's no arguing that a multiple murder has less a right to life than a child.
My only point I want to make is that it works both ways.
2006-11-25 02:17:01 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
okie dokie then. You want to get inside a pro-lifer's brain, come in and have a seat. *clears throat*
as a younger child, i believed in the death penalty. I was angry at murderers and believed they should get all that and worse for what they had done. My mother was strongly against the death penalty for religious reasons (she believed that killing a murderer before they repent was wrong) she also believed that taking a life to show how one is not supposed to take an others life was pretty hypocritical.
I turned this over in my mind; surely i thought, these killers deserve every ounce of this punishment...if not more. But it is wrong for a human to take another life.... I came to the realization that no matter how much a person may deserve death, we have no right to decide when another person shall die. I do believe this however: the state has the right to execute a murderer. Why do I believe this? It has to do with the only two reasons a person can ethically take the life of another person: in self defense, or in defense of another in danger. this goes for country's at war, as well as it goes for private citizens. there are no other ethical reasons for killing a human being. How does this connect to the death penalty? A murder threatens the safely of the nation; it is a demonstration of the states right to self defense against a threat that is carried out in the death penalty.
There is one more aspect of the death penalty that has to be examined...: When the death penalty was first instigated by the U.S., jails could be broken out of, and prisoners could escape to murder again: therefore, the murder being alive threatened the state. In this day and age, a murder once sentenced prisoned, does not offer much threat. which makes one question whether the state takes the death penalty too far. I do not make the fight against the death penalty a priority because of two reasons:
A. the states right to judge when a person is a threat
B. The murder has done a crime to validate the method of punishment.
personally, I am against the death penalty. However I dont argue against it for i find that i prefer to fight for the Innocent whose rights are trampled on than the guilty.
Your question, to be logical involves you acknowledging the unborn child as a person, for it relies on the fact that it is hypocritical to kill humans in one place and not another.
The unborn child, unlike the murderer has done nothing to deserve a death sentence. If being conceived is a crime than the real perpetrators are the parents. it is unethical to kill the child for it is in neither self defense nor defense of another in grave danger.
2006-11-25 09:55:35 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
If you are talking about the death penalty for criminals, then yes people can believe that some criminals can be put to death and still believe in abortion, if that's what you're saying. I think that you're distorting the issue with the term pro-life, with the abortion issue it's pro-choice, not pro-life, there's a difference. People can still believe in the death penalty and believe in a woman's right to choose.
2006-11-25 09:11:05 · answer #3 · answered by tucsondude 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I'm pro-choice...but I do not believe in the death penalty. They should spend the rest of their lives locked up in prison with no privileges.
2006-11-25 09:09:50 · answer #4 · answered by blueeyeskenai 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
No civilized human does, whether especially pro-life or not. Killing people is wrong, and death penalties make just it wrong+wrong= double wrong, not right. It should be a matter of principle, not an economical one or just revenge. On the other hand, abortion is not a death penalty, and in my opinion is a just call in some cases.
2006-11-25 09:08:23 · answer #5 · answered by Goswin 2 · 0⤊ 4⤋
Yes we do, it is not the same as the person that is sentanced to death is not innocent. A baby has done nothing wrong to deserve to be killed.
2006-11-25 09:20:00 · answer #6 · answered by bildymooner 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yup. Silly Repuclicans.
2006-11-25 09:05:27 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Of course they do. They're also against even the most basic of training before the use of any type of gun.
2006-11-25 10:57:37 · answer #8 · answered by Shotten 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
l am pro-life but against death penalty. God said,"thou shall not kill". Who am l not to follow Him.
2006-11-25 09:12:36 · answer #9 · answered by ? 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Some do & some do not. Yes, another one of 'lifes' ironys.
2006-11-25 09:08:40 · answer #10 · answered by ? 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋