Did you know that when Republicans banned partial-birth abortion in 2003, they limited the penalty to a maximum of two years? Two years, for what pro-lifers consider murder?
Of course, the pro-choice side has its hypocrisies too. But they at least have can claim the moral high ground by being slightly more protective of bodily autonomy, and much more protective of the disadvantaged.
I’m a little worried about politics being the mind-killer here. So I’m not going to get too involved. But I’d point out that not everyone who is pro-life is certain that abortion is murder. Moreover, you are talking about legislation, and legislation always involves compromises. So having a punishment that is less harsh than what their articulated beliefs would call for is not an indication of hypocrisy.
Now, what is hypocritical and is very similar, is that the people who say that abortion is murder aren’t out spending time bombing clinics. Whenever a clinic is bombed or a doctor killed, they rush out to say that they don’t support it. But if they did actually believe, then they would. However, there may be some degree of scope insensitivity and other cognitive biases at play here rather than simple hypocrisy.
Now, what is hypocritical and is very similar, is that the people who say that abortion is murder aren’t out spending time bombing clinics. Whenever a clinic is bombed or a doctor killed, they rush out to say that they don’t support it. But if they did actually believe, then they would. However, there may be some degree of scope insensitivity and other cognitive biases at play here rather than simple hypocrisy.
So by that logic where all the pre-civil war abolitionists except John Brown were hypocrites.
Why assume that everyone believes all murders should get the same punishment? It seems to me that even though some “animal rights activists” might believe that slaughtering a cow is murder, they still might not think it deserves the same penalty as murdering a human. I don’t believe there is necessarily a contradiction here.
Did you know that when Republicans banned partial-birth abortion in 2003, they limited the penalty to a maximum of two years? Two years, for what pro-lifers consider murder?
Of course, the pro-choice side has its hypocrisies too. But they at least have can claim the moral high ground by being slightly more protective of bodily autonomy, and much more protective of the disadvantaged.
I’m a little worried about politics being the mind-killer here. So I’m not going to get too involved. But I’d point out that not everyone who is pro-life is certain that abortion is murder. Moreover, you are talking about legislation, and legislation always involves compromises. So having a punishment that is less harsh than what their articulated beliefs would call for is not an indication of hypocrisy.
Now, what is hypocritical and is very similar, is that the people who say that abortion is murder aren’t out spending time bombing clinics. Whenever a clinic is bombed or a doctor killed, they rush out to say that they don’t support it. But if they did actually believe, then they would. However, there may be some degree of scope insensitivity and other cognitive biases at play here rather than simple hypocrisy.
So by that logic where all the pre-civil war abolitionists except John Brown were hypocrites.
What would the analogy be for people who think that the death penalty is murder? How about for people who think that war is murder?
Why assume that everyone believes all murders should get the same punishment? It seems to me that even though some “animal rights activists” might believe that slaughtering a cow is murder, they still might not think it deserves the same penalty as murdering a human. I don’t believe there is necessarily a contradiction here.