Let's look from a different angle. Is it ok to kill an unborn child and let a convicted killer live?
2006-12-28 05:53:57 · 19 answers · asked by Abu 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
BoredEnoughToPostHere - People that have sex understand that the woman might actually get pregnant. That's pretty sad you said "unwanted children". What should we do with all the people on death row? Keep them there like California does?
2006-12-28 06:04:14 · update #1
Exactly. The Dems dont understand the concept of justice. They would rather murder an innocent baby then a convicted serial killer, go figure.
2006-12-28 05:55:18 · answer #1 · answered by I Hate Liberals 4 · 4⤊ 6⤋
Okay, abortion should be illegal in ALL circumstances, correct? Is that what you're stating, because if the woman's life is in danger or the baby was born of rape and has a, probably 70% chance of being hated as the living symbol of the rape, I believe abortion should be an option. Note, an option, not the option because it's not something that you do just for the hell of it. It takes either a lot of emotion or lack thereof to kill a fetus, or child, if that's what you want to call it to further your agenda and get the feeble minded on your side, since as much as people don't want to admit it, words can convince many, especially when the biggest weapon of the right is "either you're pro-life or pro-death".
As for the second, I have no problem with the death penalty. Matter of fact, when 100% of the prisoners on death row are actually guilty, meaning absolutely nobody on death row is innocent, you could bring back the iron maiden, for all I care.
And no, I'm not a liberal. And a little tidbit: pro-choice does not equal pro-death. Pro-choice means that there is an understanding that the choice of abortion is not up to the man, it's up to the woman. The best you can do is convince her that it's not necessary.
Merry Christmas, and a Happy New Year, from Dark Angel.
2006-12-28 14:48:19 · answer #2 · answered by Huey Freeman 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Ok, let's look at it from your angle. "Unborn child" is an extremely vague term, ranging anywhere from conception to right up to before labor. Now if you were to say that it was okay to kill an "unborn child" who is just a week away from birth, I'd say that there is something wrong with you, but if it was before the third trimester, then that is not such a big deal. Also, a convicted killer should not be put to death unless (my own personal opinion), they have been convicted of terrorism. Otherwise, I do not feel that it is right to put a convicted killer to death because even in this day of DNA testing it is still not possible to be 100% sure about one's guilt. So there.
2006-12-28 13:58:27 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
Till science and doctors report the link between host and child as the law defines tenants to property evictions of unwanted children will continue .
AS far as punishment goes ,It is wrong to kill anyone . The more heinous the crime the more likely the person has a mental illness . Or may just have an adrenalin addiction . Imagine the rush you must feel when sneaking up on someone or luring them to a place where you can do as you will with someone . Try breaking into an unarmed friends house at 3 in the morning making off with his t.v or beer or something without getting caught .If you do you can explain it to him . Now do a strangers house and the excitement escalates to stimulation on a level you have never felt before . .
2006-12-28 14:20:13 · answer #4 · answered by -----JAFO---- 4 · 1⤊ 3⤋
There is, of course, a difference. A murderer has lost his right to live by doing a dastardly deed. A fetus has not yet acquired an independent right to live, because it is dependent on the mother's ability to find an additional 50,000 calories to feed it.
2006-12-28 14:17:32 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
The statistics are fascinating ... as are the motivations. It always astonishes me that the same people can be anti-choice but pro death penalty, and that in the teeth of the evidence about the death penalty not serving as a deterrent.
There are far too many people who only feel good about themselves if they are laying down the law about how other people should behave, and especially if they can find 'scriptural' validation for their beliefs. According to those same scriptures, it's OK to keep slaves and it was a praiseworthy action to offer your daughters to be gang-raped to death.
Makes me wish I believed in hell, sometimes.
2006-12-28 13:59:09 · answer #6 · answered by mrsgavanrossem 5 · 4⤊ 2⤋
im pro choise and pro capital punishment(depending on circumstances). But convicted killers liveing in jail is a pretty horrible life that they deserve and if the baby is unwanted then how wuld they b better off in and orphange waiting to b adopted?
2006-12-28 13:58:08 · answer #7 · answered by cutie123 3 · 6⤊ 2⤋
It's a little different if a women was raped and got pregnant would you expect her to keep the baby....It's not far how the gov. works if a prison is to full the will release the ones who have served most of there time.And legally you can't have a abortion after 8-12 weeks into the pregnancy
2006-12-28 13:58:39 · answer #8 · answered by celia 1 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Abortion and Capital Punishment are two different things. Letting a convicted and trully guilty killer live is pointless. All criminals should be killed.
Abortion is a womans choice. It will always BE a woman's choice. If it wasn't for abortion more stupid people would exist on this planet, as if it isn't overpopulated already.
2006-12-28 13:57:55 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 5⤋
Abolish abortion and clear out all the prisons of convicted murderers & rapists.
Then, reduce my taxes.
In Singapore for example, it is death penalty for being convicted of armed robbery.
2006-12-28 13:56:23 · answer #10 · answered by ValleyR 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋