Capital Punishment Abortion Is Murder

    We are all created equal, but it is what a man does in his life that determines whether he is righteous or wicked.
I believe that capital punishment is a topic that shouldn’t be taken lightly, just as abortion shouldn’t. I do believe in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, as those are our inalienable rights. I would like someone to explain to me, however, how exactly a criminal serving life in consolitary confinement has the rights of liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I would like someone to explain to me how any prisoner has a right to freedom and the pursuit of happiness.

Comparing capital punishment to abortion is like comparing rifles to hand grenades; they both have their uses, are in the same ballpark, and both kill people, but they are used for two totally different purposes. Capital punishment is used to deal with criminals who have had their chance at life and failed. Abortion is used to kill innocent babies that will never have the chance to make decisions.

Personally, I don’t think that capital punishment should be used in most cases, but it should be available. The problem with justice, sometimes it makes mistakes. Scott Peterson is an example, I’m sure than not every man that has murdered his wife and unborn baby has received the death penalty. Sometimes they go to jail, and sometimes they take a trip on death row, but I ask who is to decide who lives and who dies? Some people serving jail time, and some people on death row, are completely innocent. As long as a man is sitting in a cell, and new evidence proves the man innocent, he can walk free. There are few things that will ever help the man that had years taken away from him, but what happens when a man is put to death, and then found innocent?

I never said I was for or against the death penalty, I just don’t think we have the right decide who lives or dies. What about in Saddam’s case? He was a brutal dictator, and did despicable things. I believe the world is better off with him put to death.

However, assuming abortion is ok because a fetus “isn’t yet human” is also absurd. By performing an abortion, you are preventing a human being from eventually walking this earth. It is as simple as that. Using the point “We are not dealing with a conscious being” isn’t valid. Does anyone reading this remember when you were two week old? What if a person was to murder a two week old baby, do you think the baby would ever know the difference? I’ll even go this far, what about sleeping people? Do you think, honestly, if you murder a sleeping person, he or she will ever know the difference? Doesn’t “conscious” mean that you know you are alive and well? A two week old baby, or a women sleeping, neither know they are here. Yes, in a few hours, the woman will know she is here, but in a few years the baby, and even an unborn baby, will know he/she is alive and well.

The only time an abortion should be an option is if it risks the life of the mother, or if the baby is the result of incest. It could be an option in some cases of rape (I believe some cases of rape could easily be avoided by the woman). Then again, if you decide abortion is ok for a certain reason, why wouldn’t all reasons make it ok? I mean, one could say the only acceptable reason for abortion would be if it presents a threat to the mother or child. If you can justify that, then the justification of aborting a pregnancy because it may cause emotional distress to the mother, well, wouldn’t that be ok? Abortion is a hard topic to discuss, because not only is it fueled directly by emotions, more so than other opinions, but because you can’t make many decisions about abortion from hard facts. The main belief for pro-life is that life begins at conception, because that side believes in an all powerful God. The pro-choice side is fueled by the rights of women, believing that a fetus isn’t alive, so it isn’t murder. I guess if you don’t want a baby, you shouldn’t be pregnant, because if you can afford an abortion, shouldn’t you be able to afford contraceptives?

A License To Kill…

A license to kill is exactly what abortion is. Supposedly, it is the woman’s “right” to choose to kill an unborn child. What about our unalienable rights:Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (or the pursuit of all who threaten it, if you’re in the Navy)? Ah, the argument is that an unborn child doesn’t have any rights, because the baby isn’t even alive yet. What would happen if a male kicked a pregnant female in the chest, and terminated the baby? Rights?

So yes, the main argument for abortion is that it is the womans right, because it is her body. What about a woman’s rights? Does she have the right to use cocaine? How about prostitution? Suicide? What if a man claimed rape was ok because it was his body? The logical argument against that would be “But you are affecting someone else’s body also”. What about abortion? You are affecting an unborn child’s life drastically in that case.

Another common argument for abortion is that if a child is going to be born into a poverty stricken family, abortion should be an option because the child’s life would be miserable. Look at statistics, and I’ll probably say yes, this is true, a poor child will have a much harder life than a child born into riches with a Silver spoon. This doesn’t mean we should kill the child before it is born. After all, a child can be born into a rich family, and in his teen years, get involved in drugs, alcohol, etc, and permanently make the rest of his life miserable as well. Anyone remember Scott Peterson? He was wealthy, killed his wife and unborn child, and now sits on death row. Just because a person has more money doesn’t mean that they are going to be a better, more successful person than a person born into poverty. Some examples of people born into poor families are Charles Dickens, Beethoven, and Oprah Winfrey.

There will always be some people that use rape and incest as an excuse for abortion. Although these circumstances create questionable cases, I ask you if a baby born from rape is any less important than any other baby? While it is more likely that in this case the baby would be a more unwanted baby, it still would be very possible for the mother to love the baby. It is also true that only approximately 1% of all abortions are from rape or incest, so shouldn’t that fact end the argument for rape of incest legalizing abortion?

On the side of mothers asking for abortion, their arguments are usually found somewhere between not being able to afford the child, not wanting the child, not being able to care for the child, not being mature enough for the child, etc. While it is true that these women shouldn’t be pregnant, should we kill the child because of it?

I know that all this makes sense; I also know that it is very unlikely that I will change anyone’s opinion. But ask yourself this: Should killing an innocent, unborn child be allowed as a convenience in our lives?