Of course you can support both. It is not a sanctity of life question. It is a justice question. The innocent baby killed when he\she did nothing wrong is the ultimate macabre act by human kind. The key term, INNOCENCE. To be pro death penalty, the assumption is guilty of heinous crimes. I realize some people through history have been improperly executed while innocent, so my position is if the person is truly guilty (many witnesses, video evidence, etc - no question of guilt). In those cases, it is again a matter of justice. This is an adult choosing to snuff out a life or lives. There is no innocence in play. Capital punishment, in this case, is not at all at odds with being Pro Life. Innocence is the key, not sanctity of life
Again, the unborn baby is completely innocent and helpless actually in need of someone to protect it.But the criminal on death row is anything but. They have committed, most likely, murder and thus taken the life of at least one other person so yes I can see a definite difference in circumstances there.
Unborn children are not a threat to society. They have the potential to be either burdens or upholders of society. They have not done anything wrong and do not need to be removed from society. Murderers and rapists threaten others' well-being and may therefore be too dangerous to allow to live. Executing a criminal who has been prove to be toxic to society removes the threat and may end up saving more lives in the long run. It is not about defending life itself- it's about defending the innocent from undue attacks on their person.
Criminals, if they are in line to receive capital punishment, have clearly done something wrong and are not innocent. A child, who can not have helped being brought into existence and is not in any way a threat to society has done absolutely nothing wrong. The world should be punishing all murderers by giving them capital punishment, not allowing others to become murderers and legally kill their own children.
There is a clear difference between opposition to capital punishment and opposition to abortion. In the later case you are defending the right to life of the innocent, whereas in the former you are defending the right to life even of the despicable.
I would say that human life is of absolute intrinsic value, and only absolute necessity could justify the taking of it. This is not usually the case in capital punishment. Others, however, can plausibly and coherently disagree. They'd just be wrong.
If one supports legalizing the killing of gulity criminals it has no barring on the killing of innocent babies. Furthermore, the correlation and simularites between the two groups are far and few in between. If pro-lifers hold a fetus is a innocent human life than this cannot contradict the condemnation of the gulity man.
Look at it this way, Pro-lifer's hold that a fetus is morally equivalent to an independent human thus, killing the fetus is morally wrong as it is killing a being with a right to life. When you kill another person, you are committing a crime, you are not innocent, under natural law you have just forfeited any protections nature may have for you. Therefore, it is right for a third party to act as judge, jury and executioner. You gave up your claim to live by forcing someone else to give up their claim.
These are two different issues. So the reasons are diffidently not the same. Now I am Pro-choice, but Pro-life is on the issue of abortion and the other is on the issue of the Death penalty which I am against at the moment.
Pro life means you are defending the right to life. When you threaten to take ones life away, or take that persons life, you lose your right to life. A fetus has not yet done anything to warrant the loss of that right, a murderer has. Further, the DP saves innocent lives. So... yeah.
There may be a moral conflict but one can still be pro-life and pro-death penalty.
That fetus you so desperately value could very well be born into poverty. Now, I am not correlating poverty and violence, however the lack of financial stability could make one desperate for it, leading to violence such as murder; and crimes such as stealing. I agree to give preborn children a chance, but to turn around and watch the child struggle (as many Republicans love to do) and when their life-changing mistake of murdering someone puts them on death row, you are quick to applaud this act of "justice". It's disgusting, and backwards.
The DP fails to lower crime .. in fact all countries with a CP actually have HIGHER crime than those without. Also fetus and removing abortion is pro life yet con liberty. The liberty of a woman. Why should we control a womans body? Criminalizing abortions will actually result in more deaths too. While the CP is con life pro liberty. Backwards at best. When you go to jail your liberty is removed. This is inconsistent thinking and should be mocked at.
No.. Its like saying I absolutely despise hunting, then go hunting.
We cannot say that it is fair to take on life because it has done wrongs and then say it is wrong to take another simply because it has a heart beat. Millions of children are born each year to families who aren't prepared for them or simply do not want them. Criminals make poor choices but still have families who are there for them and love them dearly. Unfortunately by approving Capital Punishments, we are only punishing the families of those criminals and adding to the loss. Telling a woman or girl that she must birth a child is absurd and then ruining her life and the child's.
If you live by the rules, you live by all of the rules. The innocent fetus and the convicted felon are human beings protected God's law, moral or civil, which prohibit the taking of another life. Spin it any way you want to make your point but, Thou Shall Not Kill!