Now this is an interesting duet. Is it even possible to be Pro-LIFE and also be Pro-Death Penalty? On the surface, without much thought or brain usage, some would assume its a contradiction; but, when you think THROUGH the issue, you can support both without contradiction, and I’ll explain:
Pro-LIFE means that you believe in the absolute RIGHT of all HUMAN BEINGS to have chance and opportunity to LIVE, liberty, and to pursue happiness. It’s that simple. And Pro-Lifers believe that a fetus is a human life.
Science and Logic of HOW a Fetus is a unique Human Being:
- A Human Being has unique DNA
- Each Human Being has its own heart, blood type, brain function, and nervus system.
- Every Human Being is constantly growing (prebirth, infant, toddler, child, teen, adult, elderly)
- Every Human Being is dependent on a Host (the mother before and after birth, their parents growing up, the government, job, career, retirement home, Leftists living in grandma’s basement, etc., later in life).
- All Human Beings have a right to life – A Human Right
- A fetus is made 100% of unique human DNA 4.
- A fetus has its own heart beat, distinct from the Host, detectable 5 weeks after conception but may be developed slightly sooner 1.
- A fetus has its own blood type and can be distinct from the Host 2.
- A fetus has its own brain function, distinct from the Host, detectable around 5 to 7 weeks after conception 3.
- A fetus has its own nervus system, distinct from the Host3, and can feel pain around 12 weeks5.
- A fetus is constantly growing from the moment of conception.
- Thus, a fetus is exactly Human, and a unique, different human being from that of it’s Host.
- Therefore, because a fetus is a Human Being, he/she has a right to life.
- Therefore, the fetus has a right to body autonomy, within the mother, due to not being the body of the Host (mother).
Those 14 points logically show that a fetus is a human being. And actually a denial of this is pretty much a denial of logic and science (the study of human development). There are various stages of development in all human beings: infancy, toddler, childhood, teenager, young adult, grown adult, middle aged, to elderly… all that is denied/ignored is the human developmental stage before infancy, the stages of fetal development. An infant is just as human has a middle aged adult, thus, a fetus is just as human as an infant, toddler, childhood, teenager, young adult, grown adult, middle aged, and elderly persons.
So, what if that fetus/baby, is born instead of aborted, grows up, commits murder, and receives a death sentence? Is calling for the Death Penalty after calling for its birth a contradiction? Without using your brain, it can appear so. But, now we need to understand the ethics of the Death Penalty and the concept of Justice. Lefties are all about the consequences of choice. What about the consequences of choosing to give up on yourself, your future, and choose to take a chance with the ultimate consequence, death?
All Human Beings should naturally have the right to be afforded the opportunity to life, love, and be merry. Notice, it’s an “opportunity” or “chance” to be successful in life and in society; not a requirement or guarantee. As we all know, not all Human Beings are successful in life and in society.
The Death Penalty is for those who commit the absolute worst acts in this world, in this life. Those who violently, purposefully, and willingly take away the life of an innocent unwilling nonconsenting person (something a fetus would probably agree with, but that’s besides this point).
Why not just lock that person up in prison for the rest of their life? Why seek the Death Penalty and seek to kill someone for their chosen action, when you also support Life for fetus’?
For some, prison feels like torture. The institutionalized isolation and constant stressors of prison life that they can’t escape from for 25+ years. But, that is still better, mentally and physically, than being 9 years old and getting kidnapped, raped and tortured for hours, forcefully penetrated anally and vaginally, screaming and crying for mommy and daddy, then being strangled, passing out, revived, and strangled again while being raped, again. Then, to the point of suffocation, death, and dismemberment. Then, we see that JUSTICE is not met or served with the murderer gets a 25+ year vacation.
The punishment or consequence of life in prison, does not equate or satisfy righting the wrong that was done in that situation. Life in prison is actually far better. If the inmate was attacked, raped, and strangled, guards are required to step in and protect the life of the inmate(s). The inmates can sue their guards, facility, state, and federal government for not protecting them well enough or taking care of them well enough too. Aside from the inmate being allowed to live and breath, eat food, watch tv, write, read, have casual conversations with other inmates, build friendships and relationships with people in the outside by writing letters, seeing visitors, and being interviewed by media, when they, themselves, didn’t afford that to their victim(s). JUSTICE is a necessary element that is part of this.
Given the crime detailed above, it seems and feels deep down inside of our collective conscience that just life in prison does not satisfy the need for justice and true ethical and righteous just restitution.
But, how can pro-lifers call for the death penalty be imposed on someone? Well, you can also ask, how can they not (considering the example crime above)?
Well, they aren’t necessarily calling for it; they are agreeing with its application for two reasons:
1) The justice system permits it, and;
2) They are in agreement with the murderer, who chose to forfeit their own life by choosing to commit this act. They agree, with the murderer, that his life was willingly forfeited.
The second point is KEY in all this.
How does a murderer choose to forfeit their own life?
Well, we ALL know murder is wrong. That is a universal moral that all humans, besides absolute psychopaths, have in their conscience naturally. The Supreme Court has ruled that executing mentally handicap persons is immoral, which no one disagrees with, so that’s not even a consideration.
Thus, when a murderer executes his action of the commission of a murder, he/she is knowingly and willingly forfeiting their life, knowing they will be hunted by the system for that act, maybe even hunted by their victim’s family and friends, and if caught, spend life in the jail or face the death penalty anyway. They know all this. I know all this. You know all this. We all know these things. They, the murderer, knew these things prior to committing murder. And knowing what can, will, and should happen to them as a natural just consequence for murder, they still chose to do it; thus, the forfeit of their innocence and moral living in the world.
It is like committing suicide, vicariously, through their victim(s). But instead of an instant physical death, it is first an instant moral and ethical death, which then manifests in their life, physically. Either by their own later physical suicide, or their physical removal from society (prison).
No matter where they run and move, to a new city, state, or country, they are a murderer. They are no longer innocent anywhere they go. They are no longer living a moral life everywhere they go. Their life, in the world, was willingly forfeited on their own accord when they chose to commit suicide vicariously and create victim(s) in their wake.
Now, due to their act of murder, and the consequences that will be haunting them for the rest of their life, they have really nothing to lose anymore, which, makes them a danger to any society they move to. They are dishonest liars from that point forward, hiding and running from what they did. They are hateful, uncaring, unloving, in that they don’t care what happens to the families and friends all effected by their choice. They don’t care about the community or society as they create fear and worry in their community. Their moral and ethical standing in the world is gone (unless of course they turn themselves in, give a full confession, and become completely changed through genuine remorse, but this example assumes not).
THEREFORE, it IS possible to be Pro-Life or anti-abortion and be Pro-Death Penalty at the same time with out being hypocritical and without contradiction.
Pro-Lifers fight for the LIFE of the innocent defenseless human being in a fetal stage who does not yet have their own voice.
AND
Pro-Lifers can fight for the death penalty on someone who ALREADY chose to forfeit their own life, which makes the death penalty the only remaining remedy of Justice; to bring the best possible resolution for the innocent defenseless human being that was murdered; also fight for the restoration and closure to the friends and family of who was murdered.
EITHER WAY
Pro-Lifers appear to be fighting for innocent defenseless human beings with no voice, before birth and after death; as they put it: “From the womb, to the tomb.” And for the lives of the family and friends so that they can move on and learn to live without the person that was taken away from them.
That’s actually commendable.
What Do I Believe?
Am I Pro-LIFE? Of course! Given the proofs above, it’s logically undeniable. Especially when you can easily discredit and crush all the Pro-Abortion arguments. It becomes logically and rationally clear what position is more true than the other. A fetus is a Human being. period. Plus, abortion is racist as fu*k anyway.
But, am I also Pro-Capital Punishment? Now, that’s a tough one, for me. I believe in a life or death situation, in that moment, the individuals know what needs to be done for them to survive a life or death attack. In the process of becoming a victim of a violent crime, they alone know what needs to be done for their own survival and what is justice for their current situation. So, the use of lethal force in self-defense is justified. Same with on the battle field. But, SHOULD a corrupt government be able to accuse someone, then, kill that someone based on a trial in an imperfect system about events that the system was not present at? I don’t think “reasonable doubt” is a high enough standard. I think there needs to be a genuine, uncoerced, unsolicited confession or explicit video/picture evidence of the act that erases any sort of doubt in any mind of any juror. Witness testimony, “expert” testimony, and circumstantial evidence, should NEVER be enough to sentence someone to death. If there is no confession or explicit proof, there should not be a death sentence. It doesn’t matter how long sitting on death row takes. Life in prison is the exact same thing anyway.
Sources used
- https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/when-does-a-fetus-have-a-heartbeat
- https://childrenswi.org/medical-care/fetal-concerns-center/conditions/pregnancy-complications/blood-type-incompatibility#:~:text=Blood%20type%20and%20factors%20are,the%20positive%20gene%20takes%20over.
- https://www.healthline.com/health/when-does-a-fetus-develop-a-brain
- https://www.science.org/content/article/fetal-dna-sequenced-mothers-blood
- https://jme.bmj.com/content/46/1/3
ME AF 