What I don't get is people who support abortion but not capital punishment. Oh yeah its cool to kill babies but not a grow adult who knowingly committed a crime.

We ca again take this back to personhood. The developing fetus does not have personhood, the mother (the second life involved) does. As such it's up to the mother to make such a choice.
With the criminal we are also dealing with a cognitive agent with personhood. That person might be able to be rehabilitated. Failing that they might function as labor and/or research. The research could lead to a way of fixing what;s wrong with that person that lead to their action, detect or help others with similar problems or at least improve our understanding of how the human brain works.

fetus = not cognitive no personhood
mother = cognitive with personhood, could be negatively impacted by fetus.
criminal = cognitive with personhood and mental problems, could be helped or studied.

Notice what the fetus lacks that the others have?

If a woman doesnt want children, use protection or stay abstinent.

Given the average human sex drive abstinence is an ineffective method, and protection can fail.

the person may not be guilty

About 10% of all inmates who are put on death row turned out to be innocent. This is out of what we caught. So the actual number is likely higher.

This has a nice list of reason to oppose the death penalty.
http://www.nodeathpenalty.org/get-the-f … th-penalty

An infant child can't survive on his/her own. Someone needs to take care of it. By your logic would be ok to kill that infant?

It won't die from the mere fact of being out of the womb. Don't intentionally try to distort what I say, please.

She will know the consequences of her actions. If she truly doesn't want the child, give it up for adoption and hopefully she would ever make that mistake again.

"You made a mistake, here, bring a life into the world and go through a crap ton of pain, help overburden the adoption centers and foster care programs. I hope you learn your lesson."

^ How does that help?

So because it will have a life-impacting mental illness, it should be killed? Is this nazi germany were eugenics is practiced?

No, it shouldn't be killed because of that. However, the parents may not be able to deal with that. And by life-impacting, I meant something that makes them 100% unable to care for themselves.

If i slit your throat in your sleep you wont be aware, but that doesnt mean i should kill you.

1) I'm not growing in your body.
2) I would survive if you abandoned me.
3) I have a fully developed consciousness.
4) I have formed connections to people.

Again, please stop trying to distort what I am saying for your own ends.

A tumor  cant become a human life.

"As far as logical thought goes, it is the equivalent of a tumor that will eventually become a member of society if carried to term."

Please re-read.

Adoption is an option.

After a long process and then put into an already overflowing system that does not have the resources to care for all of them.

If that woman had consenual sex, she will have to bear those 9 months. Give up the child to an orphanage so he/she can at least have a life.

Again, this is completely ignoring the woman's right to choose what happens inside her own body. To something that is unable to live outside of her and is completely dependent upon her. To something that is not fully developed into a person and has no consciousness.

Out of curiosity, if someones guilt had been absolutely established and they committed a heinous act eg.(Sandy Hook, Aurora) and we lived in a society where money was not an issue, would you support the death penalty.

I would need to know more about why he did what he did.

Deterrence for future crimes,

Because people sure have stopped committing crimes in places where people are put to death regularly.

the removal of an evil and sadistic person from society,

Are they really evil? Or are they ill? I'm not excusing that they did what they did, but it's deeper than good and evil.

If you want to start a capital punishment thread, be my guest. We're getting off topic.

She will know the consequences of her actions. If she truly doesn't want the child, give it up for adoption and hopefully she would ever make that mistake again.

That's still forcing her to go to go through a process that can negatively impact her well being.

Deterrence for future crimes,

"The South, where 80 percent of all executions take place, has a higher murder rate than the North." -From the link I provided earlier.

I would like to ask why are so many anti-abortion advocates so anti-women's rights?

An infant child can't survive on his/her own. Someone needs to take care of it. By your logic would be ok to kill that infant?

it's not an infant, yet. she still has the right to kill it, and by all means she should if she doesn't want it. you can't kill an infant, but the fetus is free game.

She will know the consequences of her actions. If she truly doesn't want the child, give it up for adoption and hopefully she would ever make that mistake again.

do you know how many girls are up for adoption right now in china? millions of girls are up for adoption in china because the family wanted a boy as the first born. there are too many babies on this earth right now in china alone, so why should we add even more stress to the world's food, water, electricity, and oxygen supply just because your god demands multiplication?

I'm gonna give you that one because if that child is sickly or is endangering the mothers life then its better to be aborted.

what happened to your zeal? you said the mother has to live with her mistakes even if it kills her, so what is different here? maybe god is only obsessed with beautiful babies.

Is this nazi germany were eugenics is practiced?

there is a difference between eugenics, and american abortion. eugenics forced the mother to have the children, judged the "arian level" of the child, and then banned her from having any more should she birth a child with any defect. this system, however, gives the mother plenty of options, won't restrict her from aborting on her own will, and will let her have children again. these systems are more or less opposites. nice use of pathos rhetoric though.

If i slit your throat in your sleep you wont be aware, but that doesnt mean i should kill you.

it isn't alive to begin with, so therefore your statement is invalid.

A tumor  cant become a human life.

essentially, a tumor and a fetus are a mass of cells. until both become to great to control, they can be removed accordingly.

Adoption is an option. If that woman had consenual sex, she will have to bear those 9 months. Give up the child to an orphanage so he/she can at least have a life.

already went over this. look at china.

Very few murderers contribute to society. Very few.

wouldn't that prove the system, however little result, can work? all it needs in order for it to be better, is more support.

(Sandy Hook, Aurora) and we lived in a society where money was not an issue, would you support the death penalty.

in most cases like that, the gunman kills himself already, so it wouldn't really matter.

Deterrence for future crimes, the removal of an evil and sadistic person from society, and justice for the family and friends of the victim(s) and the victim(s) himself/herself.

if the person is insane, then this is a flawed view. there is no such thing as deterrence from insanity, so killing an insane person to prevent insane people from being insane is just as irrational as the insane person's perspective.

That murderer choose when his victim would die. His victim did not have a choice. His victim did not have a chance to live there life. Why should he.

because "an eye for an eye makes the whole world go blind."-Ghandi.

for future reference, I don't really care how death penalty plays out, but I can argue for both sides.

-Blade

you can't kill an infant, but the fetus is free game.

It would be best if there was no fetus to abort to begin with though, just adding.

just because your god demands multiplication?

He has yet to mention religion, so I doubt his reasons are that.

what happened to your zeal? you said the mother has to live with her mistakes even if it kills her, so what is different here? maybe god is only obsessed with beautiful babies.

Chill. He hasn't mentioned anything about religion. You're the one being zealous.

there is a difference between eugenics, and american abortion.

Eugenics is the belief that only those with the 'best genes' should live/reproduce. What you mentioned is one small part. He used the term correctly, except he was basing it on the assumption that I was saying the abortion was justified in the case of a child being 'lesser.' Which I wasn't saying, I was only giving one more reason in addition to others.

it isn't alive to begin with, so therefore your statement is invalid.

It is alive. It isn't conscious or fully developed, however. There is a distinction to be made.

@kasic-

sorry. I got a little carried away there. thanks for correcting me.

-Blade

it's not an infant, yet. she still has the right to kill it, and by all means she should if she doesn't want it. you can't kill an infant, but the fetus is free game.

So you do think that abortion is murder?

what happened to your zeal? you said the mother has to live with her mistakes even if it kills her, so what is different here? maybe god is only obsessed with beautiful babies.

If the baby is certain to die or his life endangers that of the mother then yes i do think abortion is ok. I generally disagree with, but that doesn't mean I have to support 100%.

do you know how many girls are up for adoption right now in china? millions of girls are up for adoption in china because the family wanted a boy as the first born. there are too many babies on this earth right now in china alone, so why should we add even more stress to the world's food, water, electricity, and oxygen supply just because your god demands multiplication?

That shows the flaws of the one child system in china. Males are looked to be more important then females so families would want one male over one female. I am sure if that policy was rid of many families would keep their female children.

there is a difference between eugenics, and american abortion. eugenics forced the mother to have the children, judged the "arian level" of the child, and then banned her from having any more should she birth a child with any defect. this system, however, gives the mother plenty of options, won't restrict her from aborting on her own will, and will let her have children again. these systems are more or less opposites. nice use of pathos rhetoric though.

Sorry but im having a little trouble understanding what your trying to say.

it isn't alive to begin with, so therefore your statement is invalid.

Your killing the potential of life.

wouldn't that prove the system, however little result, can work? all it needs in order for it to be better, is more support.

Were all human and we all contribute  (or at least try) to society. If a murderer has that, it doesnt excuse him from escaping justice.

if the person is insane, then this is a flawed view. there is no such thing as deterrence from insanity, so killing an insane person to prevent insane people from being insane is just as irrational as the insane person's perspective.

I never said I support that death penalty for the mentally ill. Only for adults who murdered with intent to kill and have to mental illness.

"an eye for an eye makes the whole world go blind."-Ghandi.

I really don't like that proverb. I believe in equal, not greater, retribution.

in most cases like that, the gunman kills himself already, so it wouldn't really matter.

Ok what about a man who kills his wife? He has no mental illness and purposefully killed her.

"You made a mistake, here, bring a life into the world and go through a crap ton of pain, help overburden the adoption centers and foster care programs. I hope you learn your lesson."

Some states have safe haven laws.

It won't die from the mere fact of being out of the womb. Don't intentionally try to distort what I say, please.

But it still will die without proper care, just like a fetus would die with unproper care.

I would like to ask why are so many anti-abortion advocates so anti-women's rights?

Just because I don't support abortion doesn't mean I am anti-women's rights.

"The South, where 80 percent of all executions take place, has a higher murder rate than the North." -From the link I provided earlier.

The death penalty is probably there because of the high crime rate. Also consider that crime is high in high poverty areas not just in the USA but around the world.

If you want to start a capital punishment thread, be my guest. We're getting off topic.

Agreed.

fetus = not cognitive no personhood

Still has the potential to become a person.

criminal = cognitive with personhood and mental problems, could be helped or studied.

Are you saying all or most criminals are mentally ill?

Some states have safe haven laws.

That's not really the point though, is it? You're advocating that a woman needs to 'learn her lesson' by bearing the child.

But it still will die without proper care, just like a fetus would die with unproper care.

A fetus cannot survive outside the womb. An infant can. It is separable from the mother. Further, one could consider the fetus a part of the mother's body, until such time it has a developed brain. What do you call the umbilical cord? Or that she's supplying -all- of the nutrients for it to grow? 

Still has the potential to become a person.

But is not yet one.

Bleh, didn't see the first post, only the second.

Your killing the potential of life.

Shouldn't it be the mother's choice if she wants to bring a life into the world? As you said, it is potential. So is each ovum. So is each sperm. A fetus is just further along. Each ovum has the potential to be another person, menstruation is naturally 'killing the potential of life.'

justice.

You know, I've come to dislike the term. Justice is hypocritical. Someone kills someone else, so you kill them? Now you've killed someone too.

I believe in equal, not greater, retribution.

It doesn't solve anything.

Ok what about a man who kills his wife? He has no mental illness and purposefully killed her.

I would argue that no sane person would kill their wife.