If Republicans are traditionally "pro-life," why are they also traditionally "pr

1. 60

   theCozyColordanposted 9 years ago

   If Republicans are traditionally "pro-life," why are they also traditionally "pro-death penalty?"

   replyreport
2. 61

   Zelkiiroposted 9 years ago

   You're trying to find logic amidst the GOP's platform. Stop trying to find logic amidst the GOP's platform. I will make this easy for you: you're not going to find it.
   
   It's the same reason they claim to want personal freedom yet pass laws that greatly restrict it; the same reason they call for more freedoms for business but fewer freedoms for employees; the same reason they're against Net Neutrality and all for ISPs censoring the internet; the same reason cry Freedom of Religion in favor of Christianity and balk in horror when any other religion gains any freedoms.
   
   And that reason is...the GOP is full of insane, self-interested, evil-as-fork plutocrats that want only to line their pockets with gold while turning everyone else into wage slaves to serve their corporate masters.
   
   George Carlin nailed it back in 1996:
   
   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvF1Q3UidWM

   replyreport
   1. 76

      cathylynn99posted 9 years agoin reply to this

      i love this answer.

      replyreport
   2. 84

      M. T. Dremerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      They also glorify Ayn Rand's economic model, but gloss over the fact that she was an atheist, which is the opposite of their religious base.

      replyreport
3. 64

   Jeanne Hobackposted 9 years ago

   Are you saying Democrats are neither one?

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Zelkiiroposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      The key word is "traditionally." You'll find exceptions on both sides, but more often than not, Republicans are pro-life and pro-death penalty.

      replyreport
4. 89

   Billie Kelpinposted 9 years ago

   Not only that...what about anti-abortion and pro-war? Who's protesting THAT abortion - the abortion of life caused by war? Yet, after 911 when the WORLD was on our side, when the WORLD would have supported us - we UNILATERALLY went into Iraq causing TODAY's horrendous outcome. Meanwhile, there's a whole lot of studying of the OLD Testament goin' on by people who call themselves "Christians" - Christians who, in my mind, have an extremely strange interpretation of the message of Christ. Martin Luther King acted as a Christian in the world; Ghandi of the Hindu faith, carried out ideals that Christ, in my interpretation, would embrace.
   
   A large number of CEO's in corporate America who happen to feel entitled to huge profit margins on the backs of American workers and exploitation of overseas low cost production also are proud to wear the label of "Christian" along with their Republican moniker. Meanwhile the man-on-the-street Republican, being of generous heart to those they know (and they ARE that because many Christian Republicans are my kind-hearted friends!) nevertheless see NO connection, absolutely NO connection to their use of oil and energy and their footprint on the world; see NO connection between our over-consumption of limited resources; don't BOTHER to find out if the clothes or shoes they purchase are made in a factory somewhere in the world where worker accidents like the fire in the Dhaka Bangledesh factory occur; don't BOTHER to "google" a retailers ethical standards or endorsement by World Health agencies; are CONVINCED that everyone has an equal chance for opportunity in this world and should "pull themselves up by the bootstraps"; give open-heartedly to a "mission" overseas that is there to promote their concept of Christianity and yet think every kid that wears a hoodie is a hoodlum while they themselves wouldn't take a walk in an "iff-y" neighborhood,  let alone volunteer to help make it better.
   
   If there actually are TRUE CHRISTIAN Republcans, I for one, don't see them voting that way. You've hit upon one of the greatest oxymoron of our times: "Christian" Republicans.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      theCozyColordanposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      love the discussion Billie Kelpin. It definitely does open a lot of doors and has been a hot topic in my family for years!

      replyreport
5. 60

   theCozyColordanposted 9 years ago

   I am genuinely interested in if people have a good backed opinion on this one. My family is half Republican and half Democrat and I have yet to find a good basis behind the traditional views on life and death. I, myself, am between a rock and a hard place. I personally believe in smaller government, but also have a heart for society - makes me more of a libertarian but that doesn't let my vote go very far in elections! I just wish I knew more about the history - thought maybe someone out there did. I think I would be a great hub!

   replyreport
6. 70

   dashingscorpioposted 9 years ago

   Traditionally speaking conservatives are pro-life and anti euthanasia.
   However they are pro-death penalty because it's viewed as a "punishment" for crimes committed while abortion is viewed as murder of the innocent.
   My guess is the reason why they're anti-euthanasia has to do with the fear their family may pulled the plug on them pre-maturely.
   The flip side of the coin is liberals are "pro-choice" when it comes to destroying a fetus but "anti death penalty" when it comes to putting down a mass murderer. They'd rather spend million$ on them.
   Ironically it's usually the conservatives who claim to want less government intrusion in their personal lives to make their own choices. And yet the liberals are pro-(choice) and for euthanasia rights. They're the ones arguing for the government to stay out.
   Neither side is "uniform" in the consistency of their beliefs.

   replyreport
   1. 82

      lovemychrisposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      That argument doesn't wash..since they say we are all born in sin. There is no such thing as an innocent.And they conveniently leave out of the equation the life of the woman who is already here and fully grown.I guess her life has no meaning at all.

      replyreport
7. 91

   lisavollrathposted 9 years ago

   They aren't pro-life. If they were, they would find funds to take care of the children who come into this world as a result of their constant cuts to women's health care clinics. They would fund education programs to see those children grow into well-educated young people. They would ensure that those young people have access to jobs that pay a living wage, and provide health care benefits.
   
   Republicans are pro-money. They want to make as much of it as possible, regardless of the consequences to their country or the people living in it. They have an "I've got mine, to hell with the rest of you" platform that favors the wealthy and corporations. They're pro death penalty because very few of the 1% ever receive a death sentence.

   replyreport
8. 57

   Snøwmanposted 9 years ago

   Here's the problem with the death penalty. What if we kill the wrong guy? Who would do the killing and how do we do it in an ethical way?
   
   If we just give people a life sentence instead of the death penalty it's just as good as killing them. You can't accomplish anything in prison. It's a miserable place that nobody wants to live in, especially for those that have a life sentence. It's still killing it just drags it out over a long amount of time.
   
   If we just let everyone free after their time is up it means letting dangerous people out into the world.
   
   Either way people die in a terrible way.

   replyreport
9. 69

   connorjposted 9 years ago

   
   
   I will answer this question; however, I understand it will not be popular. None the less, the reason I am pro-life is because in my opinion life begins at conception not at birth...
   The reason I believe in a death sentence for a premeditated murder of any human is so we have a significant response to this stimulus of premeditated murder to ultimately minimize this from happening. Having texted this please understand there are indeed legitimate exceptions to this and I am indeed not trying to incite anger.

   replyreport
10. 60

    TristanPoliticsposted 7 years ago

    Republicans suport lives of unborn children not serial rapist's.

    replyreport