Are abortion and the death penalty morally equivalent?

  • Thread starter Thread starter hermit
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

hermit

Guest
The church opposes abortion and the death penalty, are they morally equal?

Abortion is taking the life of an innocent individual which is clearly murder.

Executing a murderer who has demonstrated total disregard for the sanctity of human life is also opposed by the church. Why?
 
40.png
hermit:
The church opposes abortion and the death penalty, are they morally equal?

Abortion is taking the life of an innocent individual which is clearly murder.

Executing a murderer who has demonstrated total disregard for the sanctity of human life is also opposed by the church. Why?
Click to expand...
No they are not morally equal.

Abortion is intrinsically disordered, it is the murder of an innocent person.

The death penalty is not total disregard for the sanctity of human life, the person put to death is guilty of a heinous crime against society (when employed properly, which is not always the case). The Church teaches that this is permissible when circumstances warrant-- in other words, protecting society and individuals from violent criminals is not morally wrong. The Church also teaches that with today’s modern methods of incarcertation, the death penalty should have very limited use.

Abortion = instrinically evil
Death Penalty = morally acceptable, but should be used prudently
 
Yes but our prison system is seriously flawed so incarceration, though effective in theory, is a total failure.

Most criminals are repeat offenders. Need Proof? My daughters college roommate was raped and murdered by someone who had been released only two weeks before by a liberal judge. He had been incarcerated for several attempted rapes.

The death panalty may not be a deterrent to crime, but it sure is a deterrent to repeat offenders.
 
I’m so sorry to hear about your daughter’s roommate…that’s terrible. It’s always amazing to me when I hear things like that because it can be so overwhelming to be confronted by how evil people can be. That’s actually the key point about the “abortion vs. capital punishment” discussion. Abortion is the specific targeting of a completely innocent life for the sole purpose of killing it in the interests of convenience. Many times, people try to link abortion with the death penalty and anti-war movements under the “pro-life” tent. However, there are essential differences. The death penalty, although often misused in our society, has valid, justifiable reasons for existence even in a moral context…and so does war. I don’t hear anyone complaining that WWII was an unjustified war and Adolf Hitler wasn’t hurting anybody. Capital punishment and a just war can both be positive tools in bringing about the greater good…abortion can NEVER be shown to do that.
 
“The same divine law which forbids the killing of a human being allows certain exceptions, as when God authorizes killing by a general law or when He gives an explicit commission to an individual for a limited time. Since the agent of authority is but a sword in the hand, and is not responsible for the killing, it is in no way contrary to the commandment, “Thou shalt not kill” to wage war at God’s bidding, or for the representatives of the State’s authority to put criminals to death, according to law or the rule of rational justice.”
(St. Augustine, The City of God)

“Concerning secular power we declare that without mortal sin it is possible to exercise a judgment of blood as long as one proceeds to bring punishment not in hatred but in judgment, not incautiously but advisedly.”
(Pope Innocent III in Denzinger 425)

“Therefore if a man be dangerous and infectious to the community, on account of some sin, it is praiseworthy and advantageous that he be killed in order to safeguard the common good, since ‘a little leaven corrupteth the whole lump’ (1 Cor. 5:6).”
(St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Part II-II, Q. 64, art. 2.)

“Another kind of lawful slaying belongs to the civil authorities, to whom is entrusted power of life and death, by the legal and judicious exercise of which they punish the guilty and protect the innocent. The just use of this power, far from involving the crime of murder, is an act of paramount obedience to this Commandment which prohibits murder. The end of the Commandment is the preservation and security of human life. Now the punishments inflicted by the civil authority, which is the legitimate avenger of crime, naturally tend to this end, since they give security to life by repressing outrage and violence. Hence these words of David: In the morning I put to death all the wicked of the land, that I might cut off all the workers of iniquity from the city of the Lord.”
Catechism of the Council of Trent, commenting on the 5th commandment
 
40.png
hermit:
Yes but our prison system is seriously flawed so incarceration, though effective in theory, is a total failure.
Click to expand...
Your post seems to imply that it is preferable to execute certain offenders rather than fix whatever you consider broken with the penal system. Did I gravely misread your post or is this indeed your opinion?

As an aside, I agree that the US penal system as broken, as well, although we may disagree regarding the specifics. Sadly, the fate of your daughter’s roommate is not unique and similar events transpire in other countries, too.

In response to the opening post, in my view abortion and capital punishment are morally equivalent to the extent that both scenarios involve a moral judgement about a sum total of contributing factors. In each case, the question is not “what is morally right and what is morally wrong”, but “all things considered, which alternative results in the lesser overall harm”…
 
If we believe it OK to kill one person for what we consider a right reason, then is it any wonder that there is an expanded list of right reasons?

While it may be stretch to say that those that support the death penalty are directly responsible in some measure for the deaths of aborted babies, the type of reasoning used by death penalty supporters is very similar to that used by those that support abortion . And as any life gets devalued, it brings down the threshold of what is value enough to keep living.

It is clear that when Jesus said to let he who is without sin cast the first stone , He was describing a set of circumstances that have applicability to all lives and all the decisions that revolve around people taking the lives of others.

Peace
 
40.png
wolpertinger:
In response to the opening post, in my view abortion and capital punishment are morally equivalent to the extent that both scenarios involve a moral judgement about a sum total of contributing factors. In each case, the question is not “what is morally right and what is morally wrong”, but “all things considered, which alternative results in the lesser overall harm”…
Click to expand...
Absolutely not. Abortion is the murder of an innocent life. It is absolutely wrong in all cases. Are you Catholic?
 
I don’t believe they are equivalent, but I’m still against the death penalty for these reasons:
  1. Sitting in prison can give the criminal time to repent.
  2. Our legal system is flawed in favor of those with the resources to pay for good legal help.
  3. With all the free legal help available to the condemned to appeal their case, it ends up costing the taxpayer an arm and a leg to execute someone.
  4. We as a society should have evolved beyond the need to kill someone as punishment.
I think we ought to start making prison less pleasant, with no TV or congugal visits. I believe life without the possibility should be used more, especially for sexually aggressive offenders, or other violent criminals, because they can’t control their urges. I think they should limit the criminals access to free legal help, unless it directly involves their case, and even then limit their appeals. There have been criminals who’ve spent all their time doing frivolous cases. I also think that prisoners have too much free time and ought to be working their butts off.
 
Abortion is not the same as the death penalty. But I don’t like the term “death penalty”. I don’t believe death should be a punishment for any kind of crime. But if someone would constantly be a danger to the wellbeing of others even if they were in prison then they should be put to death as a means of self defense Not as a penalty…

For instance if they capture Osama bin laden they should not put him to death as a punishment for his crimes but they should put him to death to prevent further damage. This could be a reason for putting him to death. With him alive in prison there would be a high risk of terrorist attacks to bargain for his release. If he is released or not released many people would die as a result of his imprisonment. Then if he escaped more people would die as he plans more attacks.

That is just one possible scenario where it may be justified to put someone to death. But in the case of abortion it is never justified.

Josh
 
I agree with the statement it stops repeat crimes. If murderers didn’t have the oppotunity of parole, alot of people would not be pro-death penalty.

I consider them morally equivalent.
 
40.png
Hananiah:
Absolutely not. Abortion is the murder of an innocent life. It is absolutely wrong in all cases. Are you Catholic?
Click to expand...
No, I am not.

To use an analogy, our justice system doesn’t condemn offenders to death on the strength of the taking of a life alone, presumably because the fullness of offense, including any mitigating and aggravating factors are considered. In other words, it’s a complex issue.

All I have said (or tried to) is that abortion is a similarly not-simple issue. Defining the problem away is not a justified morally absolute position, regardless of the correctness of such a position.

Consider this argument:

Murder is the taking of an innocent life.
Murder is punishable by death.
Abortion is murder.
Therefore, an aborting woman is punishable by death.

Is this argument sound? Is your answer consistent with your answer to the openign post?
 
I will cite what the preeminate theologin has to say about the subject Cardinal Ratzinger -prefect of the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,

Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion. General Principles

by Joseph Ratzinger

213.92.16.98/ESW_articolo/0,2393,42196,00.html

3.** Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia**. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.

Got to love Cardinal Ratzinger. I support the death penalty and i can still be in good standing with the church. Violent criminals, terrorists, and sex offenders, should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
 
40.png
wolpertinger:
In response to the opening post, in my view abortion and capital punishment are morally equivalent to the extent that both scenarios involve a moral judgement about a sum total of contributing factors. In each case, the question is not “what is morally right and what is morally wrong”, but “all things considered, which alternative results in the lesser overall harm”…
Click to expand...
The difference is that there are no “contributing factors” that could ever make abortion acceptable. Abortion is intrincically evil which means that it is always wrong no matter what the circumstances are, which is not true of capital punishment.
 
No, they’re not equal as has been pointed out. The CCC allow’s for the death penalty only when one’s safety cannot be guaranteed from the offender, which really doesn’t apply anymore, with super-maximum prison’s being built everywhere.

John Paul II is against the death penalty, we know he’s intervened more than once to try and save the life of a person who’s death was immenent by State.

He himself visited and forgave the person who tried to murder him, did he not, and that’s a great example to us all.

:amen:
 
40.png
hermit:
The death panalty may not be a deterrent to crime, but it sure is a deterrent to repeat offenders.
Click to expand...
I oppose the death penalty for far different reasons than most. I consider it far too lenient. You can only kill the offender once.
 
Abortion and the death penalty are not morally equivalent. Abortion is intrinsically evil; the death penalty is not. The Catechism states in Section 2266: “…the traditional teaching of the Church has acknowledged as well-founded the right and duty of legitimate public authority to punish malefactors by means of penalties commensurate with the gravity of the crime, not excluding, in cases of extreme gravity, the death penalty.”
 
40.png
larryo:
Abortion and the death penalty are not morally equivalent. Abortion is intrinsically evil; the death penalty is not. The Catechism states in Section 2266: “…the traditional teaching of the Church has acknowledged as well-founded the right and duty of legitimate public authority to punish malefactors by means of penalties commensurate with the gravity of the crime, not excluding, in cases of extreme gravity, the death penalty.”
Click to expand...
That may be what is in the CC but that is a lower standard than Jesus’ standard.

Peace
 
I don’t believe they are morally equivalent. The unborn are innocent, the people who are put to death have been convicted of a crime. Even though I am opposed to the death penalty they are in no way equivalent. I do believe that if a person is convicted of what today is a capitol punishment crime, they should be locked in a cell with no contact to the outside other than the guards and reasonable medical care and left there for the rest of their lives. No TV, no books, no art supplies, no radio, no newspapers, no health center to work out in, no phone, no creature comforts other than food and shelter, just the chance to spend the rest of their lives thinking about what they have done and the opportunity to ask God for forgiveness.
 
40.png
ricatholic:
That may be what is in the CC but that is a lower standard than Jesus’ standard.

Peace
Click to expand...
How so? Did he not say: “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s”? Did he tell soldiers (the police of the day) to lay down their arms and let criminals run wild? Did he not submit to the proper authority of his time and allow himself to be crucified rather than protest that he had come to abolish all that? I don’t see where Jesus nullified the right of the state to enforce the law. St. Paul also said that the soldier carries his sword to uphold the law and that Christians were subject to that law just like their pagan neighbors. That is what I see when I take all of the NT into account and not just those passages that seem to support pacifism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top