One of these days our Spanish socialist government is going to pass a law allowing women to terminate their pregnancy until the 17th week…

The same government is completely adamant and unbending regarding the possibility of establishing the death penalty for certain very special cases on the grounds that no democratic country can legally condemn a person to die in prison…

[B]And I am completely puzzled…[/B

]In Europe –and I suppose in the USA, too- millions claim against capital punishment in countries like China, Iran, etc.

However, these same people the next day is willing to manifest themselves in favor of abortion, which is another more subtle form of killing and/or murder…
Can anyone explain what is the difference between both forms of getting rid of someone we do not desire to share our life with? :mad::mad:

One stance on the issue is that with abortion the debate often focuses on the fact that the fetus could not exist on it's own... not capable to sustain life. This is why abortions at the end of pregnancy are rarely seen or allowed, because if born, usually life would continue on its own.

In terms of capital punishment, some thoughts are that it would prevent the person, usually a murderer, from committing further crimes as well as acting as a possible deterent for others who may be contemplating such an act. There is also the great difficulty many find in knowing that the person is allowed to go on with their life, sometimes even having a better life, while the victim's is lost and the family is left with their grief.

Certainly not everyone agrees with those thoughts... thus the ever present debate on both topics that will never be resolved.

However, enough people do agree, hence why you have the laws that you do in some locations.

As with many laws, if, when, and how they are implemented will often be in debate as well.

One stance on the issue is that with abortion the debate often focuses on the fact that the fetus could not exist on it's own....not capable to sustain life. This is why abortions at the end of pregnancy are rarely seen or allowed, because if born, usually life would continue on its own.

In terms of capital punishment, some thoughts are that it would prevent the person, usually a murderer, from committing further crimes as well as acting as a possible deterent for others who may be contemplating such an act. There is also the great difficulty many find in knowing that the person is allowed to go on with their life, sometimes even having a better life, while the victim's is lost and the family is left with their grief.

Certainly not everyone agrees with those thoughts....thus the ever present debate on both topics that will never be resolved.

However, enough people do agree, hence why you have the laws that you do in some locations.

As with many laws, if, when, and how they are implemented will often be in debate as well.


In my opinion, of course, the problem is much simpler and paradoxal.

Those who are against one form of killing (capital punishment) are in favor of another form of killing (abortion) and, in both cases, they come up with reasons to justify their attitude which is totally contradictory.

Killing a murderer to prevent his committing more murders is, of course, an extreme and radical way of solving the problem. However, the same result can be attained with a life sentence. If the culprit spends the rest of his/her life in jail, he/she can hardly commit any new crimes, can he/she?

As for abortion, I do not think the problem lies on whether the fetus can or cannot exist on its own!

The actual problem is that the moment the ovule is fertilized whether we are speaking of mammals, birds or fish or even plants, a new form of life is conceived.

That is how mother Nature works as everybody knows.

But in the case of humans, we cannot skip a very important and additional circumstance.
A new life has been conceived and a soul has been assigned to that fetus.

So, when a 10 weeks fetus disappears down the drain, not only we are getting rid of a human life (not a prospect of life, but a true life), but we are also throwing away his/her soul.

Quite often I have heard that a 10 weeks fetus is nothing yet. However, we can see in the many documentary films that appear on TV at present on this subject, that practically the moment fecundation takes effect, the cell splits in two and the whole process starts.

Now then, this does not happen because the cell has a built-in battery and a mechanism to force it to split.

Nor does the sperm cell look for the ovule because something pushes it into it.
They do what they do because they are simply alive.

And if we remove them one way or other, we are “killing” some forms of life...

Human Laws are not necessarily fair and righteous. In every single case, they have been written by human beings, and as such they are, also in every case, the outcome of a way of thinking of their authors.

There may be circumstances to consider a prompt abortion as a medical necessity. I will not dispute that... But in no case can I understand the possibility of use abortion as a tool to get rid of “something” annoying that will certainly complicate our life.. :):)

Well here in canada we do not have a death penalty but abortion is legal in most provinces. I think the only province that it is illegal is
Prince edward island.

I think you have made a good point. Why on one hand they are saying capital punishment is not okay yet killing millions of innocent babies through abortion is okay. Does not make sense to me either.

My opinion and beliefs is all life is precious. Killing somebody in capital punishment. I feel that taking a life is not up to us. Even if we may feel that they deserve it. I personally feel that many people commit crimes so they will be killed. I think locking them up for life and letting them live everyday is a better punishment so their crimes are thrown at them every time they are awake. Death is too easy if you ask me.

About abortion, there is great debate on when the soul enters and so forth. My opinion is that as soon as your conceived there is life. I believe that every baby has a right to life.

Now there are certain circumstances which some would argue is a green light to abortion.

For example, a girl got raped by her father, and she become pregnant at a very young age. Should she be judged for having an abortion. The answer is no. Should anybody be judged for making this personal choice, the answer is No. God is the only judge. But to be labeled a sinner and outcast because of a decision that was best in that situation is not right either.

I am against abortion and Capital punishment, at the same time people (girls), and women alike have to make there own decisions on what to do. I also believe we are supposed to follow the laws of the land, so if one of the laws is capital punishment it is up to the government to carry that out.. If it is not supposed to be then those people involved will have to deal with God, Right?

In my opinion, of course, the problem is much simpler and paradoxal.

Those who are against one form of killing (capital punishment) are in favor of another form of killing (abortion) and, in both cases, they come up with reasons to justify their attitude which is totally contradictory.

Killing a murderer to prevent his committing more murders is, of course, an extreme and radical way of solving the problem. However, the same result can be attained with a life sentence. If the culprit spends the rest of his/her life in jail, he/she can hardly commit any new crimes, can he/she?

As for abortion, I do not think the problem lies on whether the fetus can or cannot exist on its own!

The actual problem is that the moment the ovule is fertilized whether we are speaking of mammals, birds or fish or even plants, a new form of life is conceived.

That is how mother Nature works as everybody knows.

But in the case of humans, we cannot skip a very important and additional circumstance.
A new life has been conceived and a soul has been assigned to that fetus.



This is why there is great debate and there will never be a definitive answer that everyone will agree on. I agree, if a murderer is in prision for life, they will not be able to repeat their crime. However the debate then continues... often times a life sentence does not always mean life. Again, some people feel it is wrong that part of their tax money goes to support a lifer while the victim is buried and the family must carry their grief along with knowing that the perpetrator is still living... in some cases better off than they were prior to being in prision.

In regard to the fetus having a soul... you are coming at it from a religious standpoint and obviously not everyone will do the same. The argument is when does the life become a life... at conception as many people believe, or once the child would be old enough to live outside the womb? It is a matter of opinion and while some people's opinions will be swayed on certain issues, others will not. Then you get into the situations such as rape or incest, which some people start to see as a gray area. What about health conditions... who decides which are bad enough to make it OK and which the mother will simply have to live with?

Often too you will find some opinions will change once someone has had to deal with the subject matter in a very personal way. It can be easy, for some, to say what they would do or wouldn't do, but until they are actually living that experience they won't always know for sure.

I know what I believe I would do or think in some circumstances, but do I really know for sure? I was faced with a particular situation, other than the two you present, but what I always thought I would do, what I told people I would do, I didn't do.

I have learned to be very careful with telling others what they should do... I might suggest they think about something, or consider the various options, or I might share what I believe I would do, etc. but their decision may be very different from what I would do. I might or might not agree, but it is not my decision to make.

This is why there is great debate and there will never be a definitive answer that everyone will agree on. I agree, if a murderer is in prision for life, they will not be able to repeat their crime. However the debate then continues.....often times a life sentence does not always mean life. Again, some people feel it is wrong that part of their tax money goes to support a lifer while the victim is buried and the family must carry their grief along with knowing that the perpetrator is still living....in some cases better off than they were prior to being in prision.

In regard to the fetus having a soul.....you are coming at it from a religious standpoint and obviously not everyone will do the same. The arguement is when does the life become a life.....at conception as many people believe, or once the child would be old enough to live outside the womb? It is a matter of opinion and while some people's opinions will be swayed on certain issues, others will not. Then you get into the situations such as rape or incest, which some people start to see as a gray area. What about health conditions.....who decides which are bad enough to make it ok and which the mother will simply have to live with?

Often too you will find some opinions will change once someone has had to deal with the subject matter in a very personal way. It can be easy, for some, to say what they would do or wouldn't do, but until they are actually living that experience they won't always know for sure.

I know what I believe I would do or think in some circumstances, but do I really know for sure?? I was faced with a particular situation, other than the two you present, but what I always thought I would do, what I told people I would do, I didn't do.

I have learned to be very careful with telling others what they should do....I might suggest they think about something, or consider the various options, or I might share what I believe I would do, etc., but their decision may be very different from what I would do. I might or might not agree, but it is not my decision to make.


Regarding your first paragraph let me point thi out, though this is clearly only the way I think. Considering any tax money that goes to support a lifer as an unnecessary expense, in my opinion is just tantamount to putting a price to human life. I know there are people who think like that, but they remind me of those sheriffs of the Wild West that offered a reward for someone, dead or alive, preferably dead.

I would say that this might have been a normal procedure many years ago but I would also say that, supposedly, we have improved a better since them or have we?

As to whether people in prison living better off than free, maybe this is something we should ask those in jail. I do not think anybody may prefer to lose his freedom for the sake of regularly eating and sleeping under a roof every day.

When I speak of the soul I, of course, do it from a religious point of view, which I think by the way the only possibility to speak of it sensibly. I do not think atheists believe we have a soul, so only religions are left to believe in it.

As I believe we cannot scientifically prove that we have a soul I must admit that we cannot affirm both soul and life go together, although it seems logical.

A different thing, however, is when can we consider life enters a human body, or any other animal for what matters. If we define a life form as an entity that can interact by itself without being pushed or impelled by some exterior force, like a motor, I think we can apply this definition to the conception of a human being, whereby a few million of masculine reproductive cells decide to fight their own way so that one or two can fecundate the 23 chromosomes of the female egg. Those cells are alive – as any virus, microbe, or bacteria are also alive inside our body – and as soon as the egg is fecundated a new life is formed. And that is that, scientifically.

As for special situations like rape, incest or health conditions I guess they are to be tackled from a professional point of view. But this is different from what some governments (ours, for instance) are trying to pass as a law.

I’m not telling others what they should do. But I am just pointing out what, going by our religion (if we are believers, of course) we are not supposed to do.

Other than that, everybody has got to deal with his own particular conscience. :)