Why do some people defend abortion and oppose the death penalty? KILL a baby ,but not a murderer?

Question

Correct me if I am wrong, but it’s NOT okay to put someone to death that killed (and some times worse) another person, but it is okay to kill a really really young person.

Answer 1

I agree completely with one of your answerers, Mr. Taco, in saying that these are separate issues. I also agree that if you want to have a useful dialogue, it is a bad idea your question in such a confrontational manner. It is important to have the facts surrounding the death penalty. (Some of your answers are mistaken about them.) Here are a few, verifiable, sourced, and, as you can see, completely distinct from the abortion issue.

Re: Alternatives
48 states have life without parole on the books. It means what it says, is swift and sure and is rarely appealed. Being locked in a tiny cell for 23 hours a day, forever, is certainly no picnic. Life without parole incapacitates a killer (keeps him from re-offending) and costs considerably less than the death penalty.

Re: Possibility of executing an innocent person
Over 120 people on death rows have been released with evidence of their innocence. Many had already served over 2 decades on death row. If we speed up the process we are bound to execute an innocent person. Once someone is executed the case is closed. If we execute an innocent person we are not likely to find that out and, also, the real criminal is still out there.

Re: DNA
DNA is available in no more than 10% of murder cases. It is not a miracle cure for sentencing innocent people to death. It’s human nature to make mistakes.

Re: Appeals
Our appeals system is designed to make sure that the trial was in accord with constitutional standards, not to second guess whether the defendant was actually innocent. It is very difficult to get evidence of innocence introduced before an appeals court.

Re: Deterrence
The death penalty isn’t a deterrent. Murder rates are actually higher in states with the death penalty than in states without it. Moreover, people who kill or commit other serious crimes do not think they will be caught (if they think at all.)

Re: cost
The death penalty costs far more than life in prison. The huge extra costs start to mount up even before the trial. There are more cost effective ways to prevent and control crime.

Re: Who gets the death penalty
The death penalty isn’t reserved for the “worst of the worst,” but rather for defendants with the worst lawyers. When is the last time a wealthy person was sentenced to death, let alone executed??

Re: Victims families
The death penalty is very hard on victims’ families. They must relive their ordeal in the courts and the media. Life without parole is sure, swift and rarely appealed. Some victims families who support the death penalty in principal prefer life without parole because of how the death penalty affects families like theirs.

Opposing the death penalty doesn’t mean you condone brutal crimes or excuse people who commit them. According to a Gallup Poll, in 2006, 47% of all Americans prefer capital punishment while 48% prefer life without parole. Americans are learning the facts and making up their minds using common sense, not revenge or an eye for an eye mentality.

Answer 2

It is funny you say this. Liberals say the opposite thing: how can some people defend the death penalty, but oppose abortion? Pro-life people claim that they believe in the sanctity of life, but then they kill criminals, even though it is possible that some of them are innocent. That doesn't make any sense.

I say that from the pro-choice point of view, not from my own. I'm not necessarily saying you are wrong. It is just that your argument is a two-way street.

Basically, both sides of the abortion issue like to mis-represent the other sides' position, but there is a fundamental problem with this. Most of these arguments are not based on the real controversy. The death penalty is completely and utterly irrelevant to the conversation. Pro-choice advocates do not believe that concious life begins at conception, and pro-life people do. In other words, pro-choice people do not believe that a fetus is a really young person. They disagree with you about this. That is what the real issue is.

If you really want to have an intelligent and useful conversation or debate about abortion, you have to stop with the propaganda and deal with the REAL issue. When DOES life begin? How do you know? How do you convince someone else that you are right? THAT is what you should be debating. This "death penalty" argument is lame, old, and what is more: it is an useful argument for BOTH sides of the debate. So it really doesn't help you, unless you're just here preaching to the choir.

I tell pro-choice people all the time when they complain about the pro-life movement: the pro-life people believe that a fetus is a person, and thus they believe they are saving lives. Personally, I am not an expert on when life starts or doesn't start. So who am I to question you? There are two sides to this story, and they both make some good points, so I have no official stand on it. Good luck!

Answer 3

Walter.........No one says it is ok. These two questions come from opposite ends of the spectrum, and should not be asked in the same breath. I am not even going to address the issue of when life begins. Wiser folks that I have not been able to adequately answer that question. It is a matter of one's individual conscience.

It is unfathomable, to me, why some pro-life groups feel that it is ok to murder doctors who do abortions. That is a direct contradiction. It seems that some people just have to have a cause, even if they have not thought it all the way through. Attention is addictive and seductive, and some folks will take it any way they can get it. Screaming at confused girls at abortion clinics doesn't solve anything.

These are opinions which will never converge in the American public's psyche, but one can never say never until one has a loved one involved. When all those opposed to abortion are ready to adopt and raise the child (children) they save, then they may have an opinion. Until then, they are meddling. You, as a man, and all other men, should just butt out. Isn't your life, body, etc. It is not a male issue. In THE MAJORITY of cases, if the child's father were behaving responsibly, ( then it DOES become a male issue) the girl would most probably not be at the clinic. It is always easy to sit back and run one's mouth and be judgemental, but such a different story to put one's money where one's mouth is!

We need to teach all of our children birth control and RESPONSIBILITY, if we want to see this travesty end. We cannot sit on pedestals, with our blindfolds on, and judge with one hand, and condemn with the other. There is no doubt that in this age of rampant abortion and std's, that we need to take action and find something which works, and stop spouting platitudes. Abortion should NEVER be a form of birth control. When we lose the fear of God, we lose our morality as well. A little respect for the creator would go a long way in solving both of the problems which you addressed.

As far as the death penalty.....let someone rape one of my daughters, and he would plead for the death penalty before I finished with him. The death penalty is not a proven deterrent, but it is interesting how folks' positions change when one of their own is harmed by a criminal act. Again, unless their families were directly affected, they have no right to be protesting and raising cain about something they cannot possibly understand, much less comprehend. Some of the most arrogant, cold-blooded killers in this country - think Ted Bundy or Richard Stark-have charmed some folks into believing that they are not deserving of the death penalty. Crime is rampant in this country, and the deterioration of the family bears a direct correlation.

We need to find a way that all capitol offenses have equal representation. I am not wise enough to have that answer, but it seems to be true that those with resources - think O.J. and M. J. do not receive the same penalties as those who do not have resources. The playing field needs to be leveled so that we see
"all men are created equal" in our court system. We need to find a way to differentiate between those criminals convicted with irrefutable evidence, and those convicted with circumstantial evidence. A very fine line, but a very important one.

Just remember that the murder victim was not given one more second of life, much less years of appeals. It cannot possibly be less expensive to maintain a death row inmate for years, rather than have an execution. I would rather my tax dollars support a child in need.

Just so you know, I am pro-life, and yes, I have raised 15 girls besides my birth daughters, as well as having worked in voluntary social services involved with rehabilitating prisoners for many years, so right or wrong, I have earned my opinion. What have you done to earn yours?

By the way...."my 25 cents".....You need to look up Liberal in the dictionary......has nothing to do with these issues. It is not a dirty word, anymore than conservative is, and some of us are both! It is called being a thinking person and being able to distinguish between issues.

Answer 4

I've wrestled with this in my own conscience for many years. I am anti-abortion and pro-death penalty. A contradiction? Maybe so. But I look at the unborn child as being innocent and full of opportunity, while I view the murderer as guilty and who should be denied the opportunity to do more of the same.

At the same time, I DO believe a person can change, and I do believe that life in prison gives the criminal time to think about what s/he did and hopefully to realize the error of his/her ways and turn him-/herself around. So lately I've been leaning against the death penalty for that very reason. But I'm not convinced one way or the other yet.

Answer 5

The rationalizing answer:
It's all about the wording really. People that support abortion will say they support a woman's right to choose and that they support a woman's right to privacy in what she does with her body. They will only refer to it as terminating a pregnancy. It is only a fetus and never a baby or an unborn child. When they can rationalize the issue to themselves in their head to take the human element out of it, it is easy to justify.

The death penalty, on the other hand, deals with people (to them). They view criminals as poor misguided souls who are being needlessly persecuted by the Man. Everyone is entitled to a second, third, fourth, and an infinite number of chances. The death penalty, being a permanent act, is necesarily unjust because sometimes it is proven to have been a mistake.

The More Realistic Answer:
Those that support abortion and oppose the death penalty (typically liberals) are largely concerned with: (1) inventing new "constitutional" rights out of wherever they can find them and (2) not requiring responsibility to be taken whenever possible. Supporting abortion allows individuals to avoid taking responsibility for their actions. Opposing the death penalty also allows individuals to avoid being held accountable for their actions.

Another very likely explanation is that because conservatives generally oppose abortion but support the death penalty; it is the job of the liberals to do the opposite. It can be as simple as that.

Answer 6

Well, it depends when you pinpoint when a fetus becomes a live human, doesn't it? If someone doesn't think that the fetus is a human child until it is actually born, then they obviously won't feel as bad about abortions. However, they'd still be able to say that the death penalty is wrong, since abortion, to them, would NOT be murder, while the death penalty would be.

Answer 7

I am pro both, and not because of the reasons you said, I don't believe that a fetus is a baby, and so it is not killing a really really young person. I believe that the death penalty needs to be brought back in states that have outlawed it, but I also think that it shouldn't be a peaceful thing such as Lethal Injection. I think that they should go back to hanging and firing squad. I mean come on, you know how much money that would save, Lethal Injection like 500 dollars per inmate, hanging like 20 dollars for the wood and rope, and you can reuse the wood, maybe get a new rope. that is 480 dollars you are saving. There are still states in the union that have both hangings and firing squads still.

Answer 8

2 avenues of thought that could be at work in this scenario:

1) the people who defend abortion don't consider a fetus to be a baby

2) the people who oppose the death penalty honestly believe that the gov't is representative of the populace, so a gov't who uses capitol punishment indirectly means that the people of the country support murder...or they just don't trust the legal system to only convict guilty people to a death penalty sentence

Answer 9

I agree with you completely. Alot of people think a newly formed baby is not a life. I am very much a life, although I was once an embryo. The most helpless being you can immagine, much like a newborn.
Some people say an embryo is not a life because it cannot live as a seperate being from it's mother. Neither can a newborn. They need constant care.
Liberals like what is convienient. If they have an unplanned pregnancy, kill the baby. If someone is useless in this society, why waste the tax dollars?
It's all about what benefits them. Those people are very selfish.

Answer 10

I don't know why; I believe in a woman's right to choose but generally am opposed to abortion itself; I am not opposed to the death penalty though.