Why do some Christians oppose abortion yet support the death penalty?

Well because to them a fetus is an innocent life, but a person convicted of the death penalty is getting justice.

The better question is, why are they so against abortion for a fetus, yet if that fetus grows up to be an atheist or a Muslim or anything but a Jesus believer, they are rightfully condemned to hell in their eyes (or just oblivion if they're a touchy feely Christian who doesn't accept hell) by their loving God.

Because they think that someone on death row has done things to deserve the death penalty, while an unborn child in innocent and deserves a chance at life, or something like that.

I don't like the whole wishy washy thing, personally. If you're against abortion you should be against it in all cases because if you really believe it's equal to murdering a baby then isn't it still murdering a baby even if it's the baby of a rapist?

And if all life is precious than even the life of a serial killer or mass murderer is precious.

I'm personally pro-choice and I don't really have strong feelings regarding the death penalty.

ABORTION - In Catholic morality, abortion is either direct (induced) or indirect. Direct abortion is any destruction of the product of human conception, whether before or after implantation in the womb. A direct abortion is one that is intended either as an end in itself or as a means to an end. As a willful attack on unborn human life, no matter what the motive, direct abortion is always a grave objective evil.

Indirect abortion is the foreseen but merely permitted evacuation of a fetus which cannot survive outside the womb. The evacuation is not the intended or directly willed result, but the side effect, of some legitimate procedure. As such it is morally allowable.

The essential sinfulness of direct abortion consists in the homicidal intent to kill innocent life. This factor places the controverted question as to precisely when human life begins, outside the ambit of the moral issue; as it also makes the now commonly held Catholic position that human life begins at conception equally outside the heart of the church's teaching about the grave sinfulness of direct abortion.

Abortion has been condemned by the Church since apostolic times. The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, composed before A.D. 100, told the faithful "You shall not procure abortion. You shall not destroy a newborn child" (II, 2). Direct abortion and infanticide were from the beginning placed on the same level of malice.

Hundreds of ecclesiastical documents from the first century through to the present testify to the same moral doctrine, with such nuances as time, place, and circumstances indicated. The Second Vatican Council declared: "Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception," so that "abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes" (Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, IV, 51). Pope Paul VI confirmed this teaching in 1974. "Respect for human life,' he wrote, "is called for from the time that the process of generation begins. From the time that the ovum is fertilized, a life is begun which is neither that of the father nor of the mother. It is rather the life of a new human being with its own growth. It would never be made human if it were not human already." Consequently, "divine law and natural reason exclude all right to the direct killing of an innocent human being" (Declaration on Procured Abortion, III, 12).

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT - The death penalty imposed by the state for the punishment of grave crimes. It is certain from Scripture that civil authorities may lawfully put malefactors to death. Capital punishment was enacted for certain grievous crimes in the Old Law, e.g., blasphemy, sorcery, adultery, and murder. Christian dispensation made no essential change in this respect, as St. Paul expressly says: "The state is there to serve God for your benefit. If you break the law, however, you may well have fear: the bearing of the sword has its significance" (Romans 13:4). Among the errors of the Waldenses condemned by the Church in the early thirteenth century was the proposition that denied the lawfulness of capital punishment (Argentré, Collectio de Novis Erroribus,I, 86). St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-74) defends capital punishment of the grounds of the common good. The state, he reasons is like a body composed of many members, and as a surgeon may cut off one corrupt limb to save the others, so the civil authority may lawfully put a criminal to death and thus provide for the common good.

Theologians further reason that, in receiving its authority from God through the natural law, the state also receives from him the right to use the necessary means for attaining its end. The death penalty is such a means. If even with capital punishment crime abounds, no lesser penalty will suffice.

The practical question remains of how effective a deterrent capital punishment is in some modern states, when rarely used or only after long delays. In principle, however, it is morally licit because in the most serious crimes the claims of retribution and deterrence are so demanding that the corrective value of punishment must, if necessary, be sacrificed.

I believe a one time or maybe two murderer give him a chance to repent/ask for forgiveness.(give a long jail sentence) A Serial killer he is probably just going to kill again, so to protect other life we should give him the death. Just like if somebody is in the act of murder you are by law supposed try and stop him in any way preferably just injure him. Life is precious, but are you going to give him the chance to escape jail and kill again.

The fifth commandment say you shall not murder or commit suicide. But also says you can lawful take a life to protect your own life, another's life, or by a solider fighting war. And also by an executioner (appointed by the state/country) to deliver just punishment.

Hope this answered your question.

Several people who answered this question ignore the fact that people have been sentenced to death for crimes they didn't commit. They've also ignored the fact that human beings are fallible and human institutions are bound to get it wrong some of the time. The death penalty is no exception and it buries its worst mistakes.

I am glad that you were able to find someone that confirmed your bias. I just find it funny that you ask a question about how Christians believe, and then choose an answer from a non-Christian. I just wonder why you asked the question in the first place, because you certainly were not interested in an honest answer.

Because BOTH positions show a profound reverence for the sanctity of human life.

A murderer is put to death to punish and to keep them from killing again, and to deter another from thinking murder is something for which there is no proportional punishment men will take. The law is, if you murder another, we will put you to death. This is good for a polite society.

Abortion is the killing of an unborn, the height of innocence. There is no way to conflate the murder of an innocent child in uteri with the putting to death of a murderer.

Your question is a classic "Fail."

The death penalty as pro life

Dudley Sharp

First, the "pro life" term was, originally, identified with the anti abortion movement, which still seems the most appropriate context.

Secondly, in the context of the facts, yes, of course you can be pro life and pro death penalty. There is no contradicition.

All sanctions are given because we value what is being taken away.

Whether is be fines, freedom or lives, in every case we take things away, as legal sanction, it is because we value that which is taken away.

How can it be a sanction, if we do not value that which is taken away? It can't.

In addition, more innocent lives are saved when we use the death penalty, thereby a pro life benefit.

Deterrence

All prospects of a negative outcome deter some. It is a truism. The death penalty, the most severe of criminal sanctions, is the least likely of all criminal sanctions to violate that truism.

"The Death Penalty: More Protection for Innocents"

http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/05/the-death-...

25 recent studies finding for deterrence, Criminal Justice Legal Foundation,

http://www.cjlf.org/deathpenalty/DPDeterrence.htm

"Deterrence and the Death Penalty: A Reply to Radelet and Lacock"

http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/02/deterrence...

"Death Penalty, Deterrence & Murder Rates: Let's be clear"

http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/03/death-penalt...

We have great care for innocents

In at least three ways, innocents are more protected with the death penalty, than with lesser sanctions. Another pro life consideration.

"The Death Penalty: More Protection for Innocents"

http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/05/the-death-...

The false innocence claims by anti death penalty activists are legendary. Some examples:

"The Innocent Executed: Deception & Death Penalty Opponents"

http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/10/08/the-innoce...

The 130 (now 139) death row "innocents" scam

http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/03/04/fact-check...

"A Death Penalty Red Herring: The Inanity and Hypocrisy of Perfection", Lester Jackson Ph.D.,

http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=102909A

The moral and religious arguments, in support of the death penalty, all have a foundation in respecting innocent life, therefore, when it is wrongly taken away, the highest form of sanction is provided.

As in:

Genesis 9:5-6: "For your lifeblood I will surely require a reckoning.... Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for God made man in his own image."

Chapter V:The Sanctity of Life, "Principles of Conduct: Aspects of Biblical Ethics" By John Murray, 1991 (first published 1957) by Wm. B. Eerdmans http://tiny.cc/4SFBY

"Death Penalty Support: Religious and Secular Scholars"

http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/07/death-penalt...

Because abortion is taking of an innocent life. The death penalty is taking the life of a person who has forfeited their right to live because of the nature of their crime. The death penalty actually affirms the preciousness of life because it says that your crime against another human being in which you took their life is so heinous that you should forfeit your life as punishment. And it sends a message throughout society that if you kill someone intentionally, that this is the punishment that you have to look forward to. So it saves lives as a result, because it causes people to fear the consequences and think twice before taking another persons life.

The bible affirms the death penalty in the New Testament in Romans 13.

The death penalty as the scriptures explains is to cleanse evil from amongst the people, and all who sees will be afraid of doing such crimes.