how can a person be pro life, and still support the death penalty? isn't that being hypocritical?

Answer 1

nope

Answer 2

These are separate issues. Many people support the death penalty because they are concerned that killers will be released into their communities, and because they are not yet aware of the practical issues surrounding the death penalty system. Here are a few verifiable and sourced facts about it.

The death penalty costs much more than life in prison.

The death penalty risks executing innocent people (123 already exonerated) and DNA is available in less than 10% of all homicides. It is not a guarantee against the execution of innocent people.

The death penalty is not a deterrent. Most killers do not even think they will be caught (if they think at all). Homicide rates are higher in states with the death penalty.

Life without parole is now on the books in 48 states. It means what it says. Supermax prisons are terrible places to spend the rest of your life.

The death penalty can be very hard on families of murder victims.

The death penalty does not apply to the worst of the worst. It applies to defendants with the worst lawyers.

48% of Americans prefer life without parole and 47% prefer the death penalty. We are learning.

Answer 3

Not at all. In a way, the death penalty is a pro-life measure. It seeks to save the lives of a murderer's probable future victims. Incarceration doesn't result in rehabilitation, and there are plenty of examples of murderers being released from prison and killing again. Only the most vicious of killers is given the death penalty. If a murderer's heart is so hardened that he will kill another human for personal gain, for instance, a few years in prison isn't going to soften his heart. That's been proven time and time again. What do you think would happen if Charles Manson, or Richard Speck or John Wayne Gacy were released?

Answer 4

Presented that way, it sounds like it. But as in all things in this world, equities are not necessarily equal. It's a mind trick.

In our world, people place value on many things more than life: trees, animals, etc. So it is very easy for someone to have divided allegiances or and weigh in differently on each.

To be pro-life, you have to care about the welfare of infants, etc. To support the death penalty has nothing to do with an innocent little baby, but rather the fact that an adult has chosen badly.

Great question!
Hope I helped!

Answer 5

Yes it is hypocritical, but that is American cultural Christianity. Society determines what is acceptable more than the Bible does. The life of every person, whether an innocent fetus or a mass murderer, belongs to God. He is the creator and the only one with the right to end life. "Vengence is mine" says the Lord. He will be the one to judge the penalty of sin, not us.

Answer 6

Easily. Pro-life is being against killing the unborn. The death penalty is the legally mandated and Biblically sanctioned punishment to convicted murderers.

Answer 7

Short answer: yes.

Long answer: The distinctions made between the two are often like an 'exam' of the person's religious beliefs. What I mean is that such 'examples' are made to be checkpoints within the person, real-life quizes that test the person's level of current faith. Just as experiencing a homeless person is a test of one's charity ("A samaritan was going to town..."), so too is the introduction of someone 'hateful' a test of someone's faith and ability to forgive. And, like any test, there are a spectrum of answers given, but only one right answer. How well one got the answer 'right' determines how well one is progressing in their spiritual studies.

The problem is that, depeding upon whom you ask to 'grade' your paper, it can be very difficult for the person to 'grow' from the experience. A Christian, who supports the death penalty, who asks another Christian, who also supports the death penalty, if they got the answer 'right' seeks the answer most convienient to themselves, not the answer needed to make them grow spiritually. As such, when one keeps giving the wrong answer, and given positive reinforcement to do so, then one can only continue to progress in error.

In such cases, perhaps they are continually giving the 'wrong' answer because, in actuality, they are choosing to stand by a lost-soul. In other words, because of their love for the lost-soul, they are choosing to stand and be counted amongst them, even as they are wrong. Such sacrifice for another (even in an unjust cause) can be quite spiritual and saluatory, especially if the person chooses to accompany the person in the after-life to the place of 'punishment' for engaging in such behavior. Oftentimes, it is only through the self-sacrifice of others that some can be saved, which means that the 'savior' must also walk the unriteous path as well.

So, sometimes even the hypocritical are anything but.

Answer 8

i don't think so. i think being prolife has different concerns then supporting the death penalty. With a baby...well the baby never had a chance to make the choices the man recieving the death penalty did. the difference is innocence and guilt. The baby is innocent, the man is not.


I don't have a position on the death penalty. but that's my opinion about your question.

Answer 9

No......You need to realise that an innocent baby did not do anything wrong yet it is torn apart limb by limb(do an image search). And someone who has done something so heinous, as to warrant the death penalty bought it on themselves, yet they get a nice little needle!
So no it is not hypocritical..... Its a f****** joke.
People screaming about killing rapists and child murderers
But then vilify the horrific murder of an Innocent life!

Answer 10

So, in your way of "thinking" one shouldn't see the difference between a baby in its mother's womb, and some child-molesting murderer? Or are they one and the same, somehow, in your mind? If you had a child that you loved dearly and that child was taken from you in the most cruelest of fashions- murdered by some whacked-out scum-bag- are you going to tell everyone here that you would NOT want that scum-bags nuts to get fried in the electric chair at the very least? And don't try one of those arguments about how painful it is for these pieces of worthless ****,either. So, what do you think? To erase the scum-bag, or let the tax-payers keep his sorry *** in a cell for the rest of his life?

Answer 11

Does that apply to people (like me) who are pro-choice and against the death penalty?