It only sounds like a contradiction if you take “pro-life” literally. In fact, I find this hard to understand at all if you simply just listen to pro-lifers.
Let me be clear, I’m about as firm a supporter of a woman’s right to choose as they come. I’m also adamantly against the death penalty. Do you find this position to be contradictory?
However, the general position of “pro lifers” does not contradict this at all, pretty obviously. They think that a fetus is a child that hasn’t been born yet, and because it hasn’t been born, it’s completely innocent. So you have no right to take it’s life. However, if some person in life has done something in life that removes that innocence, they believe sometimes that rises to such a heinous level that they must be permanently and irrevocably removed from society.
There are other glaring contradictions in their position, like not wanting to provide support to that innocent baby once it has come into the world, but this is clearly not one of them.
I’m pro choice but also anti-death penalty, but only because if someone is horrible enough to deserve it then they don’t deserve death, because death is the easy way out of suffering. They deserve to live long, miserable lives in a 3-meter cell.
Because it’s not about saving lives, it never has been. It’s about control.
I think they just see it as very simple: killing innocent babies - no, killing evil criminals - yes. It sounds perfectly alright if you don’t think about it too much.
It’s not about ethics, it never was. It’s about CONTROL.
I’m pro-choice, but mostly anti-death penalty, isn’t that a contradiction?
I don’t really think so. A person’s bodily autonomy and the state’s power to execute citizens should not overlap.
I think it’s not necessarily a contradiction to hold your pro-choice and anti-death penalty stance, but it’s still a contradiction to hold the pro-life and pro-death penalty stance if your reasoning behind the pro-life stance is that all life is sacred.
I agree that a person’s body autonomy and the state’s power to execute citizens should not overlap, but I still think that giving the “all life is sacred” line to justify pro-life and then being pro-death penalty “because some people deserve to die” amounts to hypocrisy.
Just guessing here, but I’d assume it’s because the unborn have potential and the bad guys had their chance. I don’t agree, but that’s what I assume being around some people like that…
You are a bad man and you should feel bad about yourself
I immediately recognized your username. Maybe take a break from the asshole shtick for sometime… and also from online.
OMG I made myself a celebrity here
welcome to high school debate class, where we think about issues with more nuance than most politicians.
Because it’s never been about anything other than control. The right to choose anything is abhorrent to them. The only rights they want you to have are the right to be dictated to and the right to be like them.
They’re obsessed with punishment. A lot of them see unwanted pregnancy as a just punishment for recreational sex.
They don’t actually care about life, they just don’t want women to have control over their bodies.
They only care until you’re born, then you can go and die in a ditch somewhere.
Even they don’t realize that what they spout is just a safe proxy cover for the real issues they are unable to articulate.
Because it’s not about saving the lives of unborn babies and it never has been.
It’s about curtailing choice.
Because they don’t care about “life”.
They care about punishing people.
It is, but they will persist because their motivation has nothing to do with rational thinking.
Because they’re not pro life, they’re pro suffering.
And they want to control others (against their will if possible), so ending someone’s life and forcing someone to gestate a baby or die in the process fall in exactly the same bag.