I am a pro-life atheist

[Tiberius]

My opposition to the death penalty is based on human rights. The right to life can't be voided just because the government says so. There are exceptions, self-defence being one of them (since you are protecting your right to life), and as such I support abortion of pregnancies where the baby is killing the mother.

[leo-rcc]

I'll be condescending when I see people favour certain types of death penalty over others, especially when they defend murderers yet condemn innocents.

But condemning women to be mothers against their will is no problem for you.

[Nine]

To me, I don't support the death penalties for the same reasons leo pointed out, plus, I think as a punishment, its weak. I consider a lifetime in prison far worse of a punishment. Spending a lifetime confined, with liberties revoked, seems far more painfull to me than the easy way out of death.

Very good point. I think its a better punishment but then you have to pay for the person to be kept in prison for the rest of their life. Not that that should be a reason for the morality of it..

[Tiberius]

@genkaus:

On the point about haircuts = murder, the difference is that it is *your* DNA, *your* life. Suicide should not be illegal, or count as murder of yourself.

An embryo has entirely different DNA, and thus is an entirely different life.

[The Grand Nudger]

LOL, wow, what a jump. Abortion straight into the death penalty. Just because you would like to argue that they are somehow alike does not mean that they are. "Some people" are so permissive with their definitions of murder. "Actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea". I'm not a big supporter of abortion either, but I'm not going to be the douche that stands there and tells a women that she has to have a baby, that somehow she's relinquished control of her womb to yours truly. I'm definitely not going to make comparisons to murder or the death penalty. Where's the body? Where's the malice? Where's the statute defining abortion as such? Nowhere on each count. You'd have a hell of an uphill battle just to begin to cross the manslaughter threshold. Once there, I'm at a loss as to how you would pump a judge or jury to go to murder (of any degree) because we're missing most (if not all) of the requirements for murder.

[Tiberius]

But condemning women to be mothers against their will is no problem for you.

They are already mothers in a manner of speaking. They do not have to be mothers in a social sense if they do not want to; adoption is available to help them.

I do not believe people should have a choice that can simply null the rights of others without valid and sound reasoning.

[The Grand Nudger]

A: I wasn't aware that fetus or embryo had been granted any rights. B: there are very valid and sound reasons that people get abortions. So where's your beef?

[5thHorseman]

Because a pre 24 week fetus is not viable without its carrier and is not a citizen of your small government, so what makes you think you or anyone else can make decisions over this?

[leo-rcc]

Adoption will not help the fact that she will have to carry the fetus to term, adoption will not help her to get food on the table when she has to stop working and get medial help. Adoption will not help her if there is a complication where she will not be able to do her previous work before (this has happened to a friend of mine who during delivery had a complication causing her unable to walk for a month and more than a year in is still recovering from that).

[genkaus]

@genkaus:

On the point about haircuts = murder, the difference is that it is *your* DNA, *your* life. Suicide should not be illegal, or count as murder of yourself.

An embryo has entirely different DNA, and thus is an entirely different life.

You are missing the point entirely.

The point is human DNA =\= human life.

But, if it makes you feel better, how about this one:

Any person cremating a dead body before it decomposes is guilty of murder, since the cells of the body are still alive.