Do you consider it hypocritical

[Jazzy]

Do you consider it hypocritical for people to be pro-life to preserve the life of an unborn child, but also be pro capital punishment and be in favor of state-sanctioned killing of a person? Why, why not?

 

[Nic]

Do you consider it hypocritical for people to be pro-life to preserve the life of an unborn child, but also be pro capital punishment and be in favor of state-sanctioned killing of a person? Why, why not?

In brief, one is preserving life while the other is punishment. So no, it isn't hypocritical. I have often considered how some pro-abortionists are against the death penalty yet well you know...

 

[tango]

Do you consider it hypocritical for people to be pro-life to preserve the life of an unborn child, but also be pro capital punishment and be in favor of state-sanctioned killing of a person? Why, why not?

I don't see it at remotely hypocritical.

As a rule people who have received the death penalty have been found guilty of particularly nasty crimes. Typically not the sort of thing you might have done without meaning to. The punishment fits the crime and all that. (Yes, I know there are miscarriages of justice so it's not as clean as it sometimes seems).

The unborn has done nothing wrong - it's merely the result of an act that in the vast majority of cases the mother did freely.

Both the support of the death penalty and opposition to abortion are essentially an acknowledgement that you can't indulge in an activity while expecting to be free from all consequences of that activity. The nuances to the two positions accept the existence of miscarriages of justice in the first instance and rape/incest etc in the second.

 

[Josiah]

Do you consider it hypocritical for people to be pro-life to preserve the life of an unborn child, but also be pro capital punishment and be in favor of state-sanctioned killing of a person? Why, why not?

First of all, I'm against capitol punishment.

BUT I see a difference: Abortion intentionally kills an INNOCENT, defenseless person. Capitol punishment kills a GUILTY person. I agree with others that it's not hypocritical. Nonetheless, I see no reason for capitol punishment, we can have life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.



.

 

[Jazzy]

I think the two issues are too distant to be fairly compared. The pro life/choice issue regards the ethics of killing a viable life and where we draw the line for something being considered alive.

The death penalty is just a punishment for people who have committed acts so reprehensible that rehabilitation is out of the question.

I don't think its hypocritical for someone to be in favor of both because there isn't really anything conflicting.

 

[Stravinsk]

Do you consider it hypocritical for people to be pro-life to preserve the life of an unborn child, but also be pro capital punishment and be in favor of state-sanctioned killing of a person? Why, why not?

Hmm. Yes and no.

Clearly, a grown person who has committed heinous crimes against others, and continues to be a threat - this person's life is worth less than an innocent not yet born in my eyes.

That being said, this line of reasoning has a huge downside, as it's often used geopolitically to excuse invasions and mass murder by governments.

I'll never forget a church man I once had a private conversation with. He was well known in the large church I went to. He sung in a church quartet. He sung solo during Christmas for the congregation. Not that anyone thought of him as a model Christian or something, but let's just say he was fairly respected.

In a private conversation he said, with a smile of appreciation, that all the goings on in the middle east at the time were to secure oil for the US. This is a statement that, although a little too broad, I mostly agreed with. However my agreement was just in the matter of fact, and his was clearly admiration, which I found disgusting, because of all the lies and killing involved.

 

[Nic]

Hmm. Yes and no.

Clearly, a grown person who has committed heinous crimes against others, and continues to be a threat - this person's life is worth less than an innocent not yet born in my eyes.

That being said, this line of reasoning has a huge downside, as it's often used geopolitically to excuse invasions and mass murder by governments.

I'll never forget a church man I once had a private conversation with. He was well known in the large church I went to. He sung in a church quartet. He sung solo during Christmas for the congregation. Not that anyone thought of him as a model Christian or something, but let's just say he was fairly respected.

In a private conversation he said, with a smile of appreciation, that all the goings on in the middle east at the time were to secure oil for the US. This is a statement that, although a little too broad, I mostly agreed with. However my agreement was just in the matter of fact, and his was clearly admiration, which I found disgusting, because of all the lies and killing involved.

Thank you.