abortion and capital punishment question?

Question

if people are against murder
and they get an abortion
or vote for it or capital punishment
is that hypocritical.
arent the people that perform the abortions and capital punishments murderers. im confused about these controversial issues? help

i didnt mean to post this in this category, i thought i clicked another, and to all you people that says life starts when your born. thats false because without conception you wouldnt have a life, your birth time is your earthly life. hypocrisy sucks

Answer 1

Per chance did you happen to notice that you posted this in the Food & Drink > Vegetarian & Vegan section??

Maybe you should consider trying this question in one of these categories instead:

# Politics & Government
# Social Science
# Society & Culture

Edit:

Since you didn't have the human decency to correct your error and delete this question I'm going to answer it.

You state that human life begins at conception. I think you need to speak to your gynecologist about fertilized human eggs. It is a simple fact that only 1 out of 5 fertilized eggs lasts a week! Under your definition that would make your g_d the largest abortionist of all! Think about that (if you are capable)

If you insist that abortion is murder why aren't you supporting fetal transplant research and offering your body as a host for an unwanted fertile egg? Even a male is capable of carrying an egg to term this way. Put your body where your mouth is! Only then will you have the right to criticize what other people do with their bodies.

Capital punishment? I'm against it. Period! For those who commit the worst crimes I feel a much better punishment is to be left to rot in a cell for the rest of their (hopefully long) life. It's actually cheaper than legalized murder and (if you ask them) a much harsher punishment! But let's face facts, you didn't come here really interested in this subject. You came to spread the flamefest that is going on in your usual choice of category!

Answer 2

Oh, puddin', you've seen the light of hypocrisy.

It's a little strange (it's a lot strange--I'm being ironic) that many conservatives are: pro-meat, anti-abortion, anti-euthanasia, and pro-capital punishment. Basically, they'll kill an animal, or a human if it's guilty. Otherwise, they think it's wrong to help a terminally ill patient die (assisted suicide) or it's wrong for a woman to terminate a pregnancy.

Now, Catholics often eat meat. But, they're against abortion, capital punishment, AND euthanasia. When it comes to humans, they don't believe in assisted death for anybody.

At least they're consistent.

As far as eating animals--a lot of people wouldn't put killing animals on the same level as killing people. So despite what you might feel about it, most people would see those as separate arguments. I mean, I wouldn't say you're wrong, necessarily, but I will tell you that most people around the world wouldn't consider killing people the same thing as killing animals. Maybe some Buddhists. But most people, no.

Hypocrisy sucks. Just learn about it, figure out what YOU think is right, and don't let people sway you! If you've thought things through and you know what's right in your heart, then go with that.

Answer 3

3. professional-abortion and anti-capital punishment. woman. Any county that enables the dying penalty has no employer even thinking approximately banning abortion. i won't be in a position to countenance giving extra rights to a zygote than a convicted offender Abortion is and can proceed to be a private, scientific selection between a woman and a doctor. Anti-abortionists, ask your self this question: do you like the government interfering in different scientific judgements, like in the Terry Schivo case? there are a number of different the thank you to do away with abortions, like giving loose beginning administration to everybody on call for. yet that may not ensue by using fact abortion isn't on the subject of the dazzling to existence, yet approximately repressing our sexuality. Abortion is criminal and has been criminal for over 30 years. Outlawing abortion won't end abortions. prosperous women human beings will continually be waiting to get abortions, it is the unfavorable that often go through. help a woman's suitable to pick.

Answer 4

First of all what do you think in the core of your heart? I usually don't ask serious questions like this from strangers. Most of the time, the answer that makes get the thumbs down anyways.
Abortion is without a doubt a terrible act and extremely selfish. If a person is not responsible and gets pregnant and are not able to raise that child, they can always give that child the chance to get adopted by a family who can't have children instead of terminating its existence. I know women who still feel guilty for having had an abortion.
Capital punishment can't be considered like murder. Why?
For exemple if someone rapes and kills your child... How would you feel? That person has taken a life. Why would he not deserve to have the same happen to him? It is only justice.
We are not supposed to live by the law of the jungle. Humans are responsible for their actions. There must be some laws that discourage people from acting like animals and capital punishment is one of them.

Answer 5

I'm for abortion and capital punishment.

OK, so I'm not very enthusiastic about abortion, and in my view it should only be done if there is physically no way a mother could look after the child, or abortion, etc. Abortion so someone can continue their career, I disagree with that, but I'm not raring to make it illegal or anything, it's just my opinion.

Obviously I wouldn't want to have been aborted, so I can see the argument of hypocrisy, but neither do I think it's fair to make a mother carry a child of rape or bring a child into the world who'll have a poor quality of life and little love or attention from it's mother. Embryos at the stage of abortion can't feel pain, so I wouldn't call it cruel, which is another reason it's different.

Similarly, I would support capital punishment for the most heinous crimes, like murder or maybe the worst cases of rape, because I think it serves a purpose. It has been shown on many levels that capital punishment is an effective deterrent even for spur-of-the-moment murders, and deters many more murders than there are executions.
Yes, it has it's problems like the possibility of an innocent man being killed, but many more lives would be saved than taken away, and many of those would be innocent too so while it may not be very nice, I definately think it's a case of the end justifies the means.

As far as hypocrisy goes, I don't think it is hypocritical, or at least not any more than prison. The law has the same right to negate someones life by execution as they do their freedom by locking them up, in my view. If the law didn't have those rights you'd be in anarchy. Supporting prison doesn't make us kidnappers, and neither does supporting hanging make us murderers. It's justice, and in things like murder it's deserved in my opinion.

Even if I did think it hypocritical, I wouldn't disagree with it. In my view the purpose of the law has to be to protect the society and its citizens, and in my view hanging does this. Adhering to social ideals like a hypocrisy free society has to come way behind that.
If you'd smoked pot when you were a kid, to tell your kids not to do it would be hypocritical, but definately not wrong.

Oh, and murder is illegal killing, so while executioners and abortionists aren't murderers. Also I don't think killing an unborn foetus is considered murder. So they may not be morally perfect people, but they serve a purpose, and if you agree with the above points someone has to do it, and I wouldn't hold anything against anyone who did.

Answer 6

It depends on your perspective. When does an embryo become a human being? I don't know, myself. If you believe that an embyo is a child rom the moment of conception you are also a murderer if you use birth control. That is a rather silly point of view and the benefit to society of safe and effective birth control makes it an imperative to alow it. If you believe it takes a certain number of cells or a certain desinity or whatever, then you need to determine exactly what that definition is and make it plain how you determine the difference. I do not believe in abortion and would have nothing to do with it for other reasons.

The real crux of the matter is that I do not have the right to make that decision for others. If you choose to have an abortion, that is entirely up to you and not my business. However, if you force somebody to have an unwanted child I expect you to take responsibility for its care and education until it is 18. You are taking it upon yourself to force something on somebody, you are responsible for the results.

The death penalty is another issue altogether and I fully support it for certain crimes. In a country that has the death penalty, or any other penalty for some crime, the criminal makes the conscious choice knowing full well that they are putting themselves at risk for being put to death. If, in full knowledge of the potential penalty, they still choose to commit the crime I have no sympathy and will press the button myself.

Answer 7

abortion is of concern only to the expectant mother ,it is nobody Else's business.

Capital punishment should be in the hands of the family of the murdered person it only effects them ,and they could use the offender as a slave for a while to make everybody feel better and have revenge

the concepts that declare that murder is against Gods laws think nothing of bombing thousands of women and children else where ,this is hypocritical

I have seen tribal Law work in rural Africa .children beating a goat thief to death,and the brother of a murdered man got his own revenge ,by killing the murderer,this same thing is effective in rural Chiaps in Mexico
there is almost no crime in these parts ,people are very polite ,and courteous,everybody knows what can happen if they rape somebodies kid ,
this law of the jungle makes peace and is very cheap and imediate
responsibility starts at home ,with the individual this is what the great Toltecs teach,it is a cop out and produces irresonsible people.if all problems are put in Gods or the government hands,and giving them control over the people taking away freedom.

Answer 8

Please read all of this. I know it is long.

I don't think that the answer to these issues is as simple as you think. I think a big problem is with the vagueness of the terms used. "Murder," for example, is a word with a lot of power, but with a wide variety of definitions. In order for a being to be "murdered," does that being have to be human? does it have to be sentient? does it have to be innocent? "Human" is another word which, surprisingly, is also ambigious.

I think that a person who is against murder but is for capital punishment and abortion is not necessarily a hypocrite. They are applying a different definition of what "murder" is. In regards to capital punishment, they would deny that an execution is "murder." While I am against capital punishment, I don't think that saying it is "murder" resolves anything. If you say that it is always wrong to kill a human regardless of their guilt or innocence (as the religious opponents to capital punishment often do), then the police would not be justified in killing a person who is threatening the life of another. If guilt and innocence are irrelevant in determining what "murder" is, then what criteria can police ever use to justify lethal force? In other words, if killing a potential murderer is murder, and killing an innocent person is murder, in any situation where a cop must use lethal force to save an innocent life, he should not do so, since he would only be using one murder to prevent another (plus now he would be the murderer instead of the criminal.) I don't think that there would be any criteria (if guilt and innocence are not factors) for him to use to justify killing the would-be killer.

As for the abortion issue, that raises the ambiguity of the term "human." You say that (human) life starts at conception, but what do you mean? There are two common uses of the word "human" which in the abortion debate get mixed up. One definition of "human" is a being which has human DNA. The other is a being which can think, experience, reason, etc. Using the first definition (a human is a being with human DNA), you are definitely right: after conception a being begins to form which has human DNA. Unfortunately what DNA you have is not a justifiable ground for moral consideration. What DNA a being has is irrelevant in determining how it should be treated. It must be the characteristics a being has which determines how it should be treated. Thus the other definition of human: being a sentient "person." Just as obviously as a fetus or embryo meets the first definition of "human" it does not meet this definition. Being sentient, however, is morally relevant while having human DNA is not. Of course embryos have human DNA, but of course they are not sentient. You said that this was asked in the wrong section, but I think there are parrallels to be drawn with the moral case for vegetarianism: should it be DNA or sentience that determines who or what should be killed for food?

If you do want to expand "murder" to include the killing of any organism with human DNA you are led to some really absurd situations. Say for example there is a fire in a hospital. A firefighter arrives on the scene and rushes inside to save the patients. Down one wing is the maternity ward full of babies, down the other is a lab with human embryos. He doesn't have time to go down both wings as the fire is spreading. Should he run down to the maternity ward and grab a couple babies (saving a few), or should he run to the lab and grab as many embryos as he can, saving dozens or hundreds? If you really believe that a morally significant human life starts at conception, I think you would have to say that the firefighter should save the embryos. This is absurd - its not the DNA that matters, or the potential for future life, its the sentience of the beings in question.

In case you think this scenario can be ignored because it is so unlikely, stop and remember that a morally similar situation is playing out now with the debate on stem-cell research.

Sorry this is so long, but you asked about a lot. I guess the main point is that before calling a person a "hypocrite" you should make sure that it is their own terms they are failing to live up to and not the terms you think they should have. And be really careful about throwing around ambiguous but highly charged words like murder. If we aren't clear about what we are talking about, there will never be any resolution.

I want to leave you with one final thought: if abortion is "murder," then the US (where I assume you live; if not, it is likely that you live in another 1st world country which also allows abortion and so you are in a similar situation) is allowing apporximately 1,000,000 murders a years, and has done so for the past several decades. The Holocaust claimed about 11 million lives, but the number of legal abortions in America since Roe vs. Wade is over 30 million. What are you, as a citizen of a nation committing the equivalent of almost three holocausts, doing about it? I certainly hope you are not paying your taxes. What would you think of a German who knew about the Holocaust, but still lived in and paid taxes to support the Reich? If he had the chance (as you do now), shouldn't he at least have moved to another country so as not to be supporting a murderous society? If you do think abortion is murder and you live in a country which allows abortions, you are effectively (through paying taxes, supporting society, respecting laws, etc) abetting murder. You are not absolved of responsibility. While you might not be morally required to launch a violent resistance, at the least you should move to a place where your money and work do not support that system.

Answer 9

It is the big liberal paradox. Save murderers, allow the termination of pregnancies. I was against the death penalty for so long but I don't know any longer if I feel that way. Same for abortion, though I was never pro-abortion, only pro-choice.

Answer 10

not rly. Generally I dont believe in capital punishment but in say saddams case he did kill thousands of innocent people.
Murder is if an innocent person gets killed. Assassinations are if politicians get killed but capital punishment is different.
Abortion is not murder, its not born yet, and it is better to take away the baby than letting it get born in a trash can and knowing its poor and unwanted.

also you must remember that a embreyo does not have a developed nervous system so its like killing a plant, it wont feel pain.