• CM400@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    81
    ·
    14 days ago

    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…

  • vzq@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    56
    ·
    14 days ago

    As someone recently told me, they don’t worry about saving lives, they worry about saving souls.

    You need to abide by the quaint rules of the magical sky daddy for that, even if they don’t make sense.

    • cheese_greater@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      14 days ago

      I dont think it really has anything to do with that. A state recently sued due to abortion and teen pregnancy reduction efforts leading to decreased teenage pregnancy rates arguing something along the lines of our populations are going down and it will cost us in population, political representation, and federal resources.

      This is about cheap/free labor, disenfranchising women, and maintaining a permanent disabled and poverty-stricken underclasses that keep everyone on up in line with the hierarchy

    • barsquid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      13 days ago

      But the Skyfather himself has given us directions to induce a miscarriage with a tabernacle dust smoothie.

  • EatATaco@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    13 days ago

    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.

    • Etterra@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      12 days ago

      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.

  • angrystego@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    edit-2
    13 days ago

    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.

  • Sibbo@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    14 days ago

    Arguably, an unborn baby cannot be guilty of anything. But an adult sentenced to death is often guilty of some horrible crime. So if you accept killing as a punishment, there is no contradiction.

    • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      14 days ago

      Until you realize that our court system is FULL of false arrests, and the courts have some stupid high number like 98% conviction rate.

      They say “take the deal, or the court will fuck you”.

      2 years vs 30 years.

      And then later they run a second trial for something else that has a death penalty as the outcome. The jury is shown this guy, already in prison, for a semi-related charge. Already convicted of the other charge. So his ability to appear innocent is already swayed. And now suddenly there’s no deal. The court goes full hammer. The jury is made to believe he did it 100%.

      And he can’t say he didn’t do it, and wasn’t even there, because he ALREADY pleaded guilty to the other charge which would place him there.

      So now you got a populace, who wasn’t in either court session, not seeing how this escalated, and not willing to believe our court system may be flawed. Just kill the criminal and move on, right?

    • bamfic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      14 days ago

      An unwanted unplanned baby is punishment for having sex outside of marriage.

      Death penalty is punishment for being convicted of murder.

      It’s perfectly consistent when you look at it all about punishment.

      The cruelty is indeed the point

    • dhork@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      14 days ago

      Roman Catholic doctrine opposes both, but the bishops don’t go around threatening to withhold religious services for politicians who allow the death penalty like they do with pro-choice politicians…

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    14 days ago

    contradiction

    You’ve discovered conservative politics. Party of freedom that wants to restrict women’s access to healthcare, books in schools, reproductive rights, healthcare for children, etc.

  • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    13 days ago

    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.

    • Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      13 days ago

      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.

  • linearchaos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    14 days ago

    In the end, it’s because they’re told that that’s the way it is.

    Abortion makes a an easy political point. Vote for the children.

    Being hard on crime and executing people, That’s another easy political point. Vote for the law abiding citizens.

    They don’t care that those two things are at odds They don’t care about life or death. They care about their own exact situation, and don’t really give a rat’s ass about anyone else. They believe that the team they’re backing gives them the best advantage, and that’s absolutely all they care about. Beyond that, it’s simply consuming and regurgitating the propaganda, self-perpetuating.

  • chalupapocalypse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    14 days ago

    Because they are hypocrites, once that baby leaves the womb they give zero fucks.

    Don’t get an abortion, also we aren’t paying for that kids lunch