Is it Contradictory to be against Abortion but Pro-death Penalty?

Is it Contradictory to be against Abortion but Pro-death Penalty?

Carol Costello’s article “Can you be Pro-life and Pro-death Penalty?” examines the controversy of a pro-life supporter being pro-death penalty. Catholics have maintained the “consistent ethic of life.” They have insisted on the sacredness of life because it comes from God and it should not be terminated by any man. This means that the Catholic Church is against abortion and the death penalty as well. Mohler, as elucidated in the article, further argues that Lockett deserved to die owing to the nature of the crime. The crime was so big that only death would be the best form of justice. That meant that some people are pro-death depending on the intensity or magnitude of crime committed. It is also quite clear that others believed that if one believes in the sacredness of life, then one would be opposed to death penalties, abortion and even euthanasia. There has also been inconsistency in how people reacted to issues related to life; some strongly oppose abortion but strongly support the death penalty. Basing on the article, this paper argues that it is possible be pro-life and pro-death penalty without contradicting your ethical principles.

Central in the abortion discussion will be the punitive attitude towards the whole issue. Either way they don’t always see any contradiction in the matters for instance those who support abortion don’t see it as an act of terminating life. Consequently, it is argued that the Catholics consistent ethic to life approach is not so rooted in them because initially, they supported capital punishment. Finally, there is an argument regarding the innocence, those who are pro-life argue against abortion by the virtue of the little unborn thing being innocent unlike a mature person who has committed several crimes hence pro death. In my opinion it brings a lot of contradictions to be pro-life and pro-death because it creates double standards.

Firstly, newborns are helpless creatures that are flawless, besides are the right to life whereby life starts at conception. The newborn having been conceived is immediately protected by the right to life, irrespective of whether they can be seen or not, therefore they are very innocent and pure and blameless, they therefore deserve every reason and right to be left to maturity. On the other hand, I am pro-death simply because of justice. Depending on the nature of the crime that a person has committed, he deserves to get a punishment proportional to the magnitude of the crime. For instance, the intensity of a crime can call for one to be hanged to give justice to the victim. I don’t find it contradictory being pro-life and pro death simply because we highly consider the innocence nature of newborns whereas the criminal is no longer innocent and for that he goes against his right to life.

On the contrary the stand may be argued against, in counter argument, innocence is not objective but rather subjective, and we cannot measure the level of innocence hence subject to disposal. On the other hand, it may be totally wrong for the following reasons; it is contradicting to be pro-life and pro death at the same time, I choose life campaigns major argument is that it is wrong to terminate a pregnancy because life is sacred. Human beings are created by God and it’s only Him who has the powers to give and end a life. However a woman has a choice to make regarding whether she will carry the pregnancy to full term or terminate it depending on the circumstances there in. there is nothing wrong with ending a pregnancy as it is solely a choice besides this is to avoid very many issues that may arise due to the pregnancy being carried to term, in simple terms it’s for the benefit of the mother. On the other hand, being pro-death is totally unacceptable; this is for the fact that its only God who has the ability to take away a life, forgiveness is seen to be key in the biblical context and therefore we all should exercise the act of forgiveness, biblically, there is no sin that cannot be forgiven and there is no sin that is of a greater magnitude than the other, that means if one steals a pen, and another shoots a victim on the chest five times, before the eyes of God all are the same and can be forgiven, why then can’t we forgive rather than hanging the criminals? Why then can’t we give them second and even third sixth chances for them to reevaluate their actions and changes? For this case death should totally be abolished and different punishments designed since human beings have zero permission to take away life.

However, we should all be pro-life and choose life, life is sacred and therefore should never be terminated for any reason, God gives life and he has the powers to take it away hence abortion is a crime. On the other hand criminal offences that are severe and that lead to psychological torture of a victim, the repercussion to the criminal should be a death penalty this is only then that justice will be achieved.

In summary I am for pro-life and pro-death, life is sacred, little newborns are innocent, why terminate innocent creatures. Even when life is sacred, we should respect every life; committing a crime against innocent child for example raping a child should be countered by death as the only way for justice. Therefore, it’s my appeal that we carry our newborns to term and deal with crimes in a more just way.