How can you be against abortion and for capital punishment?

I was just trying to get a handle on McCain's new VP when I became disturbed by two ideologies which just don't make sense when used in the same sentence.
How can you be for putting someone to death who is already alive and still be against killing someone who hasn't been born yet?
I'm confused, my head hurts, where are my pills?
I know I'm about to be thoroughly raked through the coals, backwards, with no clothes on, but that's OK.
My solution has always been that pro-lifers should be willing to adopt all the babies they save, and people convicted of capital offenses should spend the rest of their sorry days in solitary confinement with no TV, no visits, no mail, and just enough food to keep them alive for a long time.
Let the games begin !! I'm real interested in the tangents this post will take.

reply to post by zlots331


Ok, I will try to unclog your brain.

Capital punishment. The key word here is PUNISHMENT. A person did a horrific act against another person and is punished by having his or her lights turned out. They took action against another human, and by extension, against society as a whole. Society decides to remove that person from the planet and send their soul to God for judgment.

Abortion. A baby is alive in the mother's womb. The baby is about to be born and has their entire future ahead of him or her. It an entire future in which the baby becomes a contributing member of society. It's an entire lifetime of love, happiness, having children, raising a family, and having the potential to make a positive contribution in the world. Those who are anti-abortion feel that the mother of this baby could bear the responsibility of being inconvenienced by brining the child into the world so that the child has a chance to live out its life.

Those who are anti-abortion do not feel that the lifetime of the child is less valuable than a few months of having the mother inconvenienced. Those who are anti-abortion feel that society has an obligation to protect the right to life of the child.

Now I'm not saying I agree or disagree entirely with any of the above, but it might help you understand the answer to the question you asked.

Errr... The baby is innocent?


And maybe the guy they caught with body parts in his fridge and a stomach full of human flesh should be "done away with". Or the guy on video tape torture murdering a young girl maybe doesn't need to waste our taxpayer money as there is no hope of reform. (I know, extreme examples but you get the idea).

reply to post by jamie83



Great post jamie. Great Post!

You said everything I wanted to say and expressed my feelings perfectly.

Marilyn~

As clearly and succintly a I can put it, an unborn baby has made no choices. a convicted felon has made a choice.
I am more than willing, as someone who has done a little bit, to tie the knot.

There's a very simple distinction between the two that justifies this supposed contradiction, at least to me.

A criminal who is being subjected to capital punishment has, through some horrible act that they themselves have committed, forfeited not only their right to ever be reintroduced into society, but in those select few cases, their right to life.

What crime has an unborn child committed? None. Why should that child's right to exist be forfeit due to the foolish acts of the parents? I can see few justifiable reasons why an innocent should be put to death before they've ever really had a chance at life and through no fault of their own. And of those justifiable reasons, the parents lacking the self-control to keep their pants zipped isn't one of them.



[edit on 29-8-2008 by vor78]

I think all of the responses called it right.
The bottom line is that an unborn baby is innocent, and deserves the right to life.
The criminal has been found guilty of taking a life and therefore has forfeited his/her right to their own life.

Imagine if Hitler had been tried for the first life that he was responsible for taking, and was executed. How many lives would have been saved?

capital punishment is a moral issue.

if murder is such a horrendous crime should the state be carrying it out?

most civilized countries think not. The state should be setting an example not condoning muder in any way. You also have miscarriages of justice and theres no coming back from the death penalty.

i think the decision to terminate a pregnancy is a decision for the woman alone and they should have the right to choose. Its just a bunch of cells not a person anyway.

[edit on 30-8-2008 by yeti101]

Those who are anti-abortion feel that the mother of this baby could bear the responsibility of being inconvenienced by brining the child into the world so that the child has a chance to live out its life.

Those who are anti-abortion do not feel that the lifetime of the child is less valuable than a few months of having the mother inconvenienced.

Thanks for the great responses so far. I wanted to respond to the above quotes because it kind of clarifies a point that I believe is important, to me anyway.
To be clear, I am against the taking of any life, for whatever reason. That's why I feel the two statements don't go together.
I agree that someone made bad choices resulting in a pregnancy they didn't want to happen. I use "they" because there were two people involved. It's not a case of someone being "inconvenienced" for a short period of time, it becomes an issue of what happens to the child after it's born, for the next 75 years lets say. The chances are pretty good that at least some of these children will be at an immediate disadvantage. They may be born to a single teenager for example, who probably will not be able to give the child the care that it needs. That's why I offered that those who are anti-abortion (to use your term) should be first in line to adopt the child and guarantee that that child grows and prospers in a loving home. Not just insist that the child be born without considering the consequences that the child may face in a home where it already has two strikes against it.
I'm probably still not being clear. But that's OK. Thanks again for your responses.

reply to post by yeti101



"A bunch of cells" is way off!
A baby has feet and little toes at 6 weeks!
At 24 it can live outside of the womb!

When I had an abortion at 19, I thought it was a blob at 3 months and
it was THE worst thing that I EVER did!
The nurses and doctors didn't tell me anything about it!
It's a good reason a woman should have a sonogram BEFORE she kills it!
(Even though planned parenthood opposes it!)
I became a COMPLETE mess after I had it and I wasn't religious AT ALL.
I bacame agoraphobic and I had psychotic features.

The abortion process is so horrid that many people don't even want to know how it's done.
A saline abortion burns the baby alive and sometimes That doesn't even kill it,

A needle is inserted through the abdomen to remove amniotic fluid. A strong salt solution is then injected, which poisons the fetus and badly burns the lungs and skin. The child is usually delivered within 24 hours.

A D&C is where they open the mother's cervix and use a curette to scrape the baby out and bring the pieces out and count them. (sometimes they miss pieces and the mother could get septocemia and die)
A D&E

Forceps are inserted into the uterus through the vagina and used to separate the fetus into pieces, which are removed one at a time. Lastly, vacuum aspiration is used to ensure no fetal tissue remains in the uterus (such tissue can cause serious infections in the woman). The pieces are also examined to ensure that the entire fetus was removed.[2]

D&X is worse

Intact D&X, or partial birth abortion first involves administration of medications to cause the cervix to dilate, usually over the course of several days. Next, the physician rotates the fetus to a footling breech position. The body of the fetus is then drawn out of the uterus feet first, until only the head remains inside the uterus. Then, the physician uses an instrument to puncture the base of the skull, which collapses the fetal head. Typically, the contents of the fetal head are then partially suctioned out, which results in the death of the fetus and reduces the size of the fetal head enough to allow it to pass through the cervix. The dead and otherwise intact fetus is then removed from the woman's body.

Preemie babies can feel pain more than full gestational babies and yet, some think nothing of killing them in grusome ways!




[edit on 30-8-2008 by Clearskies]

Q: How can you be against abortion and for capital punishment?

Actually, I'd like to know how you can kill an innocent fetus due to inconvenience, at the same time letting a guilty and convicted premeditated murderer live off the state for the rest of his/her life? Is it because the fetus has no voice, and doesn't matter?

reply to post by CO Vet


I think this is where the obligitory "I usually despise everything you say" comes in , but I REALLY like the way you reversed the subject !!



[edit on 30/8/08 by Misfit]

The Major is always a little confused when a liberal is for abortion and against capital punishment. The thought of executing a complete innocent, but sparing a convicted scumbag is a philosophical mystery that the Major's moral compass cannot navigate.

The Major is always amused when a liberal tries to create a conundrum where one doesn't exist. Equating capital punishment to abortion is ludicrous and disingenuous. There is no comparison to a long drawn out legal battle replete with endless appeals and hand wringing and a quick jaunt down to the local Planned Parenthood Clinic for a little coat hanger justice.

The Major will entertain the comparison between capital punishment and abortion when each potential abortion is given full legal representation, a jury trial, a lengthy appeals process, and a death warrant signed by the governor of the respective state. The Major figures that much like the current capital punishment situation, the fetus will have most likely reached legal age.

Dismissed.

Well, so far nobody has answered my question about the adoption issue. Seems pretty straight forward to me. Save the baby and bring it into your home. Go to your closest clinic and instead of protesting sign up to pay all the medical costs and then bring the baby home after the birth. Pretty much solves the issue, keeps it from becoming a federal issue that divides the country, and gives the child a better chance of a happy life. Really, I am completely serious.

Originally posted by CO Vet

at the same time letting a guilty and convicted premeditated murderer live off the state for the rest of his/her life?

This actually brings up another point. How many of the saved children end up living off of the state? I believe that many of the children born to poor single mothers become wards of the state for many, many years.
I repeat again. No life should be taken for any purpose. It's just an act of revenge, either to an unwanted pregnancy or to the most vile criminal that ever lived.
We are the most technically advanced country in the world. How can we condemn other countries for atrocities against their citizens when we routinely kill our own at alarming rates? It's pathetic.

reply to post by zlots331


I have worked at a crisis pregnancy center and donated money.
They provide a LOT of resources (apart from government) that give these women and babies what it takes to become self-sufficient, Job training, what ever they need.
Churches donate money to these centers.
You realize that adoption agencies pay these women for their medical and other needs?

[edit on 30-8-2008 by Clearskies]

Originally posted by zlots331
Well, so far nobody has answered my question about the adoption issue. Seems pretty straight forward to me. Save the baby and bring it into your home. Go to your closest clinic and instead of protesting sign up to pay all the medical costs and then bring the baby home after the birth. Pretty much solves the issue, keeps it from becoming a federal issue that divides the country, and gives the child a better chance of a happy life. Really, I am completely serious.

Or, how about this. Make people be responsible for their actions. Birth control is readily available to everyone, and a lot less messy than vacuuming a fetus out of a womb.

Originally posted by zlots331
Well, so far nobody has answered my question about the adoption issue. Seems pretty straight forward to me. Save the baby and bring it into your home. Go to your closest clinic and instead of protesting sign up to pay all the medical costs and then bring the baby home after the birth. Pretty much solves the issue, keeps it from becoming a federal issue that divides the country, and gives the child a better chance of a happy life. Really, I am completely serious.

I am glad you are serious. I did adopt a baby.

I also have a friend who was pregnant and my wife and I begged to adopt her baby. She refused and got an abortion instead.

She claimed it would be too difficult for her to know that somebody else was raising her child.

I guess the bottom line is this world is an imperfect placed filled with imperfect people just trying to get through life the best they can. They make the best decisions they know at the time. And all we can do is make them aware of other choices.