I know they are many republicans out there who are pro-choice, but the vast majority are "pro-lifers" but still support the death penalty and reckless pointless wars that kill thousands of U.S. troops and little brown children unnecessarily. If they love Jesus so much why don't they try to be like him more? Please don't think I hate Republicans. It's the religious right that gets on my nerves!
2007-05-12 12:29:28 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
support the death penalty because most of the people incarserated are minorities, mostly black.
love war because they're stuck in their ways that are influnced by their religious biases. so instead of trying to understand and accept other peoples lifestyle, they'll fight them to change them to their own image.
republicans are usually old and white. pro-life means there would be more people they can try to brain-wash
2007-05-12 12:39:31 · answer #1 · answered by vandenlain 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I am pro-choice, but the reverse of your question could be asked just as easily: If Democrats support the lives of murderers and are pro-appeasement, how can they support the mutilation of fetuses?
Here's the difference: fetuses don't even have the chance at life that felons or terrorists have.
Again, I am pro-choice, but I do think these are compelling arguments which should be treated seriously. I agree that the religious right has all but destroyed the Republican party. First of all, their endless carping about social issues diverts Republicans' interests from issues that resonate more directly with people's lives, such as, tax relief, spending cuts, social security reform, etc. Second, I think their obsession with social issues cheapens statesmanship by turning the political arena into the Oprah Winfrey show.
2007-05-12 18:05:35 · answer #2 · answered by Jesus Jones 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Death penalty - There are crimes so horrible, such as serial killers, cold blooded murderers, etc. that those who are convicted of commiting such crimes don't deserve the priviledge to live, but rather, they deserve the ultimate punishment, death. So, this is a moral reason. There is also a practical reason in that the death penalty serves as a deterent for some of those who would consider committing such crimes. Admitted, there as some murderers so whacked out, the death penalty won't deter them.
War - We don't believe in reckless pointless wars. We do believe that freedom isn't free, that when the president of Iraq is killing innocent people, is building weapons of mass destruction (so we all believed), ignors ultimatums from the United Nations, that ultimately, the only thing left to do is to act with military force. Looking back at world war II, when madman Hitler raped Europe, we had a "don't get involved policy" so we stoodby and watched. It wasn't until Japan attacked the US fleet at Pearl Harbor that we decided to get involved.
To drive this point home, consider the following situation. Let's say, there is a bully on your street and he starts making threats that he is going to hurt you. He doesn't like the color of your skin, or whatever. One day, he sees you, calls you an expletive, and starts running towards you, with a look of rage in his eyes. You believe if you do nothing, he is going to serious hurt you. Will you defend yourself and fight him? What Jesus would do is not relevant here, since Jesus had a mission to die for our sins. I believe that it is moral to defend one's self. Also, under certain circumstances, it is morally justifiable to execute a preemptive strike. For instance, if you really know someone is going to kill you, or your family, you have the right to kill him first.
Yes, we Christians (religious right) and others do love Jesus. But that doesn't mean we are willing to die for the sins of others. Why does this thinking get on your nerves?
2007-05-12 13:10:28 · answer #3 · answered by Robert T 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
i will only talk for myself yet in answer to you questions: i'm professional-existence by fact i think in retaining the main vulnerable existence interior the international---the unborn, who've unquestionably no way of retaining themselves and count on us to furnish them the 1st actual desirable any person could have--- the terrific suited to exist. i think interior the demise penalty by fact i think that evil does exist. Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is demise--- Exodus 21:12 "He who strikes a guy so as that he dies shall truthfully be placed to demise"--- (New King James version) and there are others. we could continuously undergo in ideas we live in mans imperfect international and attempting to do the terrific we are able to. that's terrible that an harmless individual be placed to demise wrongly, yet we are human and do make human errors. have faith it or no longer, there are mandatory wars----no longer reliable ones, yet mandatory. Even interior the Bible there have been wars. Examples-- Proverbs 20:18 each and every purpose is widespread by information; by smart council salary conflict. The conflict of Jericho---others. What approximately Exodus the place the 1st born sons have been struck down, which incorporate the Kings son. weren't they innocents? It grow to be then that the slaves have been released from bondage. some died so as that thousands and thousands ought to bypass in peace. nicely, besides, No. i don't experience like a hypocrite in any respect.
2016-10-15 12:14:18 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Innocent life should not be killed because the infant's life is no more valuable than the mother or physician that kills it.
No matter what face one tries to put on it - it is a form of birth control and will eventually have dire consequences.
Murderers do not respect life and they are not innocent. They chose to take anothers life. War is a fact of life and people will be killed unless we all just submit and drink the kool aid like they did at Jonestown.
2007-05-12 12:37:29 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
OR the question could be:
If most Liberals are "pro-death" why are they against the death penalty?
It's OK to kill an innocent baby, but bad to execute an outrageous criminal....HMMMM.
Both sides are hypocritical it seems
2007-05-12 15:38:23 · answer #6 · answered by njay6nine 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You are goofy. In the US we have a Constitution. We are supposed to have the right to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness. Abortion is the taking of the life of an innocent unborn child. Capital punishment is earned by the criminal. We have laws in the US. Break a law and suffer the consequences. These are two entirely different matters. War is hell. But history has shown that it is sometimes unavoidable and sometimes necessary. Jesus is a religious issue. War is a political issue. Remember now...separation of church and state. Your thoughts are all mixed up.
2007-05-12 12:38:24 · answer #7 · answered by regerugged 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
It's as simple as this; Taking of an innocent life is wrong, whether it's an unborn baby or an innocent victim. Death penalties make sure that another "INNOCENT" life will not be taken!! As far as war is concerned...It's a self preservation move! We got vermin who want us dead,and don't care how they do it. We stop them before more INNOCENT Americans are killed!
2007-05-12 12:41:25 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Cons are hypocrites. Look at the members of their rank and file:
Foley, Gingrich, DeLay, Nixon, Agnew, and several religious right pastors...
2007-05-12 12:37:12 · answer #9 · answered by MenifeeManiac 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They need bodies to go & fight their wars for them.
They like the death penalty because it helps to keep people in line.
2007-05-12 12:34:59 · answer #10 · answered by Floyd B 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋