Nothing specific in the bible about it, no passages that simply cannot be interpreted some other way. Right?
Then why is the death penalty all right? Why is it a woman can't decide to have an unviable fetus removed, but she can be put to death if she does. More to the point, why is it wrong to abort a fetus that will turn into a baby who has no chance in the world of being happy, healthy, and good but it's all right to kill him when, after a hopeless childhood, he does something to deserve the capitol punishment. Is there anything in the bible that justifies that? Is there anything in the bible that balances the logic out here?
2007-11-27 14:14:34 · 30 answers · asked by Sarrafzedehkhoee 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Well, it seems to me that many people want to use 'thou shalt not kill' for non-human cells in the womb, and 'well, I'll kill if I want to' for capitol punishment. It seems to me, that if you are going to MAKE people have children -- and apparently, for the answers, being stupid and getting pregnant deserves the 'punishment' of motherhood -- you ought not kill them if they turn out to be murderers or whatever it is you want to kill them for.
2007-11-29 14:45:23 · update #1
no where in the bible does it say anything about anti abortion.
i personally had an abortion because the baby would not have been able to have a good life..adoption is messed up enough.
and i am still a religous person.
people that think abortion is wrong because its so called in the bible are stupid...because its not!
http://abortionsupportsite.blogspot.com
2007-11-27 14:44:08 · answer #1 · answered by girlwithoutaname 3 · 3⤊ 2⤋
These are separate issues. More and more people on both sides of the abortion issue are rethinking their views on the death penalty as a result of the exonerations of innocent people on death row. You don't have to sympathize with criminals or want them to avoid a terrible punishment to ask if the death penalty prevents or even reduces crime and to think about the risks of executing innocent people. None of this relates to views about abortion.
124 people on death rows have been released with proof that they were wrongfully convicted. DNA is available in less than 10% of all homicides and isn’t a guarantee we won’t execute innocent people.
The death penalty doesn't prevent others from committing murder. No reputable study shows the death penalty to be a deterrent. To be a deterrent a punishment must be sure and swift. The death penalty is neither. Homicide rates are higher in states and regions that have it than in states that don’t.
We have a good alternative. Life without parole is now on the books in 48 states. It means what it says. It is sure and swift and rarely appealed. Life without parole is less expensive than the death penalty.
The death penalty costs much more than life in prison, mostly because of the legal process which is supposed to prevent executions of innocent people.
The death penalty isn't reserved for the worst crimes, but for defendants with the worst lawyers. It doesn't apply to people with money. When is the last time a wealthy person was on death row, let alone executed?
The death penalty doesn't necessarily help families of murder victims. Murder victim family members across the country argue that the drawn-out death penalty process is painful for them and that life without parole is an appropriate alternative.
Problems with speeding up the process. Over 50 of the innocent people released from death row had already served over a decade. If the process is speeded up we are sure to execute an innocent person.
BTW: The Catholic Church (definitely against abortion) is also strongly against the death penalty.
2007-11-28 01:33:21 · answer #2 · answered by Susan S 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Gene: The death penalty is a response to a crime, its a consequence and the Bible supports personal responsibility and consequences for crimes (sins). The unborn fetus is not aborted in response to anything its done.
That being said, I support choice although I think abortion should be a last resort, lots of waiting lists for adoption. I oppose the death penalty because the legal system has screwed up too many times but I guess I support death for multiple killers where there is no doubt and I support it where the convict requests it.
2007-11-27 14:20:48 · answer #3 · answered by davster 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Why do you speculate that the child will never be happy, healthy, or good? Thats not right. You have already declared this child worthless. Because you say that it probably wont be happy, healthy, and good. Lets abort it because thats the right thing to do. Its so easy to elect an abortion now because the life of the baby has been predetermened as worthless, never will be happy, probably bad person who will end up on death row. Aren't you glad that you weren't thought of that way? To make abortion more acceptable, the value of the life must be taken away from the victom. The baby must be called fetus. Even up to 9 months. Then the stereotype judgement, Pobably will never be happy, healthy, or good.
How would you like to be in a court room with a judge that looked at you that way.
2007-11-27 14:36:05 · answer #4 · answered by guitarrman45 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
okay...ill say what i know..hopefully it'll help.
obviously in order to become pregnant one must have intercourse. if you are irresponsible and get pregnant, then why complain? everyone knows what the chances are...if you gamble..be prepared to take responsibility.
death penalty is different..you did something to deserve punishment..what does an unborn child do? it did not "create" itself..and many people have good childhoods and do bad things...and that child may have a chance to be happy..each person's life is different..i believe taking away anyone's life is wrong..more so of an innocent child.
yes the Bible does say in ecclesiastes i believe( sorry if im incorrect)that the luckiest are those that never live to see the evil in this world. however, in the new testement it is a sin to kill a human. children are gifts from God...since i last knew..you don't dispose of gifts.
idk if i helped at all...
My God people...it is a child regardless if you use scientific terms! if your stupid enough to get pregnant without wanting a child then put the child up for adoption! and anyone who has had an abortion and does not regret it, you have blood on your hands...what if your parents had seen you as worthless...people like you disgust me with your lack of morals...
2007-11-27 14:22:21 · answer #5 · answered by Mit 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Gene,
As I was looking this up yesterday there was nothing specific.
But I was thinking of the 10 commandments Thou shalt not kill
I never heard of a woman being put to death for abortion but
she will have to live with this for the rest of her life.
2007-11-28 03:22:42 · answer #6 · answered by sweet_blue 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You are confusing killing with murder. The commandment is "You shall not commit murder." from webster: "the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought".
It is not our decision to make that a baby has no chance in the world to be happy. The baby is innocent and has done nothing to deserve being killed. On the other hand, some criminals have indeed done things that merit the death penalty, and do not need nor merit our sympathy.
The Bible is full of the logic that the world is hungering for. All the world has to do is listen.
2007-11-27 14:27:16 · answer #7 · answered by ready4sea 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋
"Abortion is wrong because it's killing, right?"
I disagree with this statement. A fertilized egg is not a baby.
It's a potential human being, just like sperm and egg (also alive) are potential humans. The "sanctity of life" is an ambiguous phrase that is being manipulated by some Christians for political objectives.
What I consider the definition of person hood is consciousness, including the perception of pain. As a baby develops gradually in the womb, these qualities do not emerge until later in the pregnancy. I do oppose third trimester abortions, except for the health of the woman, which should be paramount.
80% of all abortions take place in the first two months, and there is nothing to see. Women who take RU-486 shed their uterine lining, and there are no horror images associated with late term pregnancies that the pro-life movement uses in their cause. Nor is there any pain on the part of an embryo.
I also think that the death penalty is wrong because it kills a human being with awareness and the perception of suffering. If it is unnecessary to kill someone, why do it? Is retribution in the form of violence a quality that we wish to value in our society?
2007-11-27 14:26:09 · answer #8 · answered by Dalarus 7 · 6⤊ 3⤋
Abortion isn't about whether the fetus will turn into a happy child or a sad child or a neglected child, it's about whether the fetus has the right to inhabit the body of another sentient being without consent. The answer to that question is no. Even if I considered the fetus to possess full person-hood I would still answer the question the same way.
2007-11-27 14:25:08 · answer #9 · answered by Eiliat 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Actually, Big Super, the "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth," wasn't justified in the Bible, even though it is mentioned. That phrase was in the Code of Hammurabi, which was the code of laws at that time.
In Matthew 5:38-42, it says “You have heard that it has been said, 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth': But I say to you, That you resist not evil: whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also. And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him two. Give to him that asks thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.”
I'm not trying to sound like a jerk, I just noticed what you said and I just finished studying Hammurabi's code in Civ. Just thought I would let you know.
2007-11-27 14:27:07 · answer #10 · answered by Ledeh 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋