> MikeyWhoa wrote:
>> I agree. We both share the same sentiments on criminals being executed for the
>> part. The questions I'm asking him are the same I subject myself to.
>> I'm just curious as to why most pro-lifers think that life is sacred when
>> fetus technically can't live yet, but not so sacred when fully grown, and merely
>> accused of a serious crime.
> It's not accused.
> It's tried, convicted, and endless appeals. I think it's pretty obvious he's saying
> we have to assume the guy is guilty here, and then it's OK. Basically if you decide
> to murder and are found guilty and sentenced to death, that was your conscious choice,
> a baby has done no such act.
> Now you're getting into him just being accused, that's a whole other subject about
> justice system and it's flaws etc, not really what this is about.
> Basically a pro lifer would say you have a right to live until by your own actions
> against society you give it up. It's actually not hypercritical at all.
But being accused, tried, convicted, and exhausting all appeals doesn't mean someone actually committed the crime. There are numerous cases of people being exonerated and saved from death row. There are also numerous examples of innocent people who weren't saved. There have been innocent people put to death by our justice system. Were their lives not sacred?