To be against abortion and in favor of capital punishment is hypocritical.

Instead of addressing entire paragraphs, I'll choose specific quotes and try to analyze them within their context as well as possible. "These are the worst criminals we have on the planet, they have had the chance to live a life in our world." Really? I wasn't aware that there was a one-strike-you're-out thing for life. Besides, the only people who suffer the death penalty are those who have already entered the court system. It seems far more appropriate to even give a lifetime jail sentence than a death sentence, as it still keeps the criminal away from the victims and the rest of the world, but doesn't kill them. I personally would prefer even more leniency than that, but this isn't about what I would prefer; this is a logical analysis of when murder is appropriate and when it isn't. No matter how horrible the person you kill, no matter how much bureaucracy involved, murder is always murder. So if the court system orders and executes the death of a 3-time convicted rapist and murderer, there's hardly any difference in the result than if that same rapist and murderer was unconvicted of those crimes and was killed in the street by a family member looking for revenge. Revenge with paperwork doesn't make it any less wrong. "The line between a new born baby and a murderer/rapist is just that. THIS IS THE LINE" That's a very, very, very thick line to span over that much. After all, according to you, there's a lot in between. What if the murderer claims self-defense? What if the second-degree murderer is a politician, perhaps the Commander-in-Chief himself? "I'm open to hear any reason how a murderer could be a "help" to society please do go on. " Why, thank you, I will. THE SAME WAY ANY OTHER HUMAN BEING DOES--get a job, raise a family, donate to charity, take a bike instead of a car, invent a new hairdryer, whatever. You seem to assume that, if someone murdered someone else, that's the only event in their entire life. People frequently make an assumption with similar basis that all people other than heterosexuals are obsessed with their sexuality. A murder is only a small portion of a man's life, albeit with a large effect. If you don't agree with the previous argument, then answer me this: how does killing the criminal "help" society? If locking him behind bars does the same job, then what does the government do but damage? It's traumatic for everyone he's known, who do not consist solely of the person he's murdered and any accomplices he may have had. By the way, I expect that an argument to this point will be that capital punishment is justified, while actual murder is not. But look at it this way: legalized murder is taking place every day. People get awarded for it. Many innocent people have been killed in Iraq by American soldiers, accidentally or not, and their killers have never been so much as brought to trial. That's first degree murder, isn't it? Yet again, I ask where the line falls between the innocent and the guilty, the fetus and the murderer. "This is terrible logic and hardly worth debating its like giving an infinite free pass to any criminal." I agree; the community service idea BY ITSELF is not a good method of dealing with people. I never intended that it would be employed alone, but I guess I failed to communicate that. Besides, my example was simply an example; disproving it still doesn't disprove my primary argument, that killing anyone for any reason is a crime against nature and that there are better ways to handle the situation. And by the way, a patronizing tone, while a tempting debate tactic, isn't going to help your case. It's the issue we're talking about, not me; keep it to the issue. "Also I'd like to point out the lack of comparison between abortion and death penalty I don't know but I thought the debate was about how someone could believe in both not just the merits of the death penalty which is humane through lethal injection." I never said we were comparing Abortion and Capital Punishment. I said that it's hypocritical to support one and not the other, since (I added later) both are forms of murder. I can go into detail, if you like, about Abortion, but that's not where we really seem to disagree, so I felt it was pointless to approach. However, I'll approach it anyway. The typical reason to not support abortion is because it is the killing of a living human being. If you support the death penalty, than I don't see why killing a child who will destroy a family or a life is much of a leap. Personally, I don't really consider fetuses to be complete living beings until they are disconnected from their umbilical cord and begin thinking for themselves. Even if you don't believe this, though, it's oxymoronic to support the killing of a murderer but not an unborn child. Pets are "put down" to relieve their pain all the time; if the baby is not yet born, then an abortion may be a way of putting it down to quickly end a life of pain. The majority of abortions are to keep a baby from being born into an unhealthy situation: if convicts should be killed to make the world a better place, why shouldn't unwanted children? It would also make the world a better place to not have them. (I don't believe this--it's just parallel to the argument in favor of capital punishment) I know I'm not going to get the last say in this, and the last word always makes a huge difference, but I'm going to ask that everyone compare the logic here, not vote in defence of your own opinions. Hopefully that goes without saying. Thank you again, Jokerduede, for accepting such a controversial debate.