Way more than that.

I don't really want to be the one to initiate contact with people, but I might have to

But I'm certainly not going to until I have time to coordinate all of that

I can't help but chuckle at the irony of Tim Pool ragging on the death penalty, about how it's one if his most important issues, while also being pro choice.

Abortion and the death penalty are nearly identical in practice.

They overlap in the fact that neither a unborn child or criminal is wanted. They overlap in the death of that person.

Where they differ is who decides to bare the burden of sustaining them, and how much potential the individual has to contribute to society.

Unborn children = Unknown potential for good or bad
Criminal = In most cases only has potential for harming society.

Death penalty = State deciding someone's right to life
Abortion = An individual deciding someone's right to life.

While you can argue for either position, they aren't the same. So equating them doesn't really help you.

Yeah I would consider pro choice + anti death penalty = hypocrisy to be on par with pro life + pro death penalty = hypocrisy
Which is to say I don't consider either statement valid

Of course there are differences between them, but conceptually you're taking the life of someone you don't want to care for.

The primary differences being who's deciding to do the killing, and the innocence/potential of that life.

You're just selecting the components of both that you personally want to equate and then attributing that to your opposition

You can't argue for the sanctity of life while also arguing that killing unborn babies is acceptable.

Then it's a good thing that the death penalty debate doesnt hinge on sanctity of life isn't it?

What grounds can a pro choice activist stand on that isn't contradictory to being against the death penalty?

If someone is put up for a death penalty, it was because of Their actions. Of them not valuing the sanctity of other life. And while you can argue that if you care about all life, then you should also care about the persons life on the line of a death sentence. It does not follow to the argument of weather or not we can define when life begins.

@DJ_Anuz I agree. I'm against both

I'm a big supporter of consistent life ethic

As am I.

I guess if the argument is that an unborn child is not a life then they aren't comparable in that instance.

Except by every objective metric the second an egg is fertilized it is a new unique human life. Undeveloped, but still a human life nontheless.

I'm not arguing when a life begins or not, i'm telling you those are 2 different arguments.

One is retribution one is convenience, I don't see them as the same at all

But they're not the only arguments, lots of people I meet who are pro choice agree with me that a unborn child is still a human life. My point is more that it's worse to kill an unborn child than it is to kill a murderer, but most people you meet who are against the death penalty are likely also pro choice.

It's outrageous

I think they would generally say it isn't a baby

They are also likely the same people who would steep a $150k fine for breaking a turtle or eagle egg.

I'm only for the death penalty in mass murder situations where the perpetrator was essentially caught in the act more as a burden of proof issue

Yeah, criminals and babies aren't the same. Though Democrats are generally incoherent, they at least acknowledge people should pay a price for crime

Not everyone who gets charged is the actual perpetrator. You can come back from being jailed (usually) but not from being killed

There's also the "when human life starts" debate, and not all pro choice people are hippies

The Libertarians that act like killing someone as retribution for murder is the same as killing an innocent person and therefore is hypocritical annoy me so much I don't want to agree with them

You are arguing a great many things. Both are worth consideration, so its good to keep talking about them. But try not to conflate the 2 is all. @DJ_Anuz
It is possible for a human to have contradicting ideas in their lives, it happens all the time (some do it more then others). Whats important, is how we justice our own beliefs and how well they work out in reality.

Pro choice libertarians annoy me the most like lmao

@Shadows Fair enough.

I'm not 100% sure where i stand on the death penalty. It would be an easier choice for me if we didn't put to death the wrongfully accused. But such is life, full of difficult choices.

Yeah, I struggle with it

I used to be staunchly opposed to it because of the whole not being 100% sure of guilt thing.

Now I struggle with it too.

I might lean towards against.... But its hard to say.

Kind of oddly I was more against it when I was a hardline atheist because I was so convinced death was the absolute end.

Now I am more inclined to spirituality and think it might be less final than that.

I still think it might be wrong to kill except in defense though so...

I'm not sure how good it is to judge someone based on what may or may not happen after life, but to each their own. :)

It's not a justification exactly. Just a removal of one of the stronger reasons to be staunchly against.

I still come down mostly anti.

Lol as a Christian I guess you could say I should be against based on what I think will happen to them after they die