The Lead

At the Republican debates this week, Texas Governor Rick Perry, defended before a cheering audience his stance on the death penalty. In the past, he has stood before crowds proclaiming himself staunchly "pro-life" when it comes to abortion. How can the two views be reconciled?

The Washington Post On Faith blog asked a panel for their views.

But first, Robert P. Jones, writing in the Washington Post blog "Figuring Faith" looks at the polls and finds that most Americans, while generally more pro-choice than Perry, pretty much agree.

Perry’s identification as a strong supporter of “a culture of life” and what he called the “ultimate justice” of capital punishment, however, raises some potentially thorny questions about the meaning of being “pro-life.” In campaign season, the question is whether American voters, especially voters who identify as “pro-life,” are going to raise concerns about why Perry’s position doesn’t represent what some Catholic theologians call “a consistent ethic of life,” opposition to both legalized abortion and capital punishment. A quick foray into public opinion, however, seems to indicate that Perry may be facing little pressure on this front for at least two reasons.
First, while the political catchphrase “pro-life” may appear to be straightforward, PRRI’s recent survey of Millennials, Religion, and Abortion found that a surprisingly wide array of Americans identify with the term. Strong majorities of the American public, for example, identify as both pro-choice (70 percent) and pro-life (66 percent) in the context of the debates over the legalization of abortion. And when the debate is extended beyond abortion to other moral issues such as capital punishment, the meaning of the term becomes even hazier.

Second, only about one-in-ten (11 percent) Americans hold a “consistent ethic of life” position, opposing legalized abortion and capital punishment. In fact, in the general public, there is no significant correlation between attitudes about the legality of abortion and views on capital punishment. Fully two-thirds of Americans overall say they favor the death penalty for persons convicted of murder, compared to only three-in-ten who say they oppose it. Support for capital punishment is virtually identical to the general population among Americans who say abortion should be illegal (69 percent) and among those who identify as “pro-life” (69 percent).

The Washington Post turned to a panel of writers and theologians and asked "Can you be pro-life and pro-death penalty? How does one reconcile these positions?"

Among the responses:

Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite asks Who would Jesus execute?

Jesus represents. Romans were all about using power to control people; Jesus, by contrast, was about power shared in his program of “heal the sick, eat with those you heal, and announce the Kingdom’s presence in that mutuality.” The New Testament presents us with a struggle between two different kinds of power, Crossan argues, the Roman imperial model of power that promises “peace through victory,” victory guaranteed by lethal force, or “Jesus’s peace through justice.”
Jesus was executed by the Romans in order to further their domination of the occupied Jewish community. It was naked power, exercised as only the Romans could, through the extreme torture and eventual death of prisoners through crucifixion. Being pro-execution, whether in ancient Rome or Texas today, is more about power than it is about justice.

I find that much of the “pro-life” position seems to come from a similar view of power; it’s all about control, a top down conception of power. The anti-abortion movement is often more about controlling women’s procreation than it is about protecting life. If life were indeed sacred in the anti-abortion movement, then killing doctors who provide abortion services, like Dr. George Tiller, would be unthinkable, as well as undoable, and obviously it is not. The escalating attack on women’s health services, in the strategic de-funding of Planned Parenthood state-by-state, is also not “pro-life” since the vast majority of Planned Parenthood’s work (about 90 percent) is not providing abortions but life-saving health screening for women and girls, and pregnancy prevention. It’s about controlling women’s choices. It’s about power as control.

Bishop John Shelby Spong writes about the contradictions of religious people:

I do not understand why people are surprised by contradictions in the lives and rhetoric of religious people. The most overtly religious part of our country practiced and defended both slavery and segregation with no apparent sense of discomfort. If the religious voices of the Protestant right and the Vatican were silenced, opposition to the basic rights and justice for homosexuals would be almost non-existent.

Bishop N.T. Wright reflects on American Christians and the death penalty:

You can’t reconcile being pro-life on abortion and pro-death on the death penalty. Almost all the early Christian Fathers were opposed to the death penalty, even though it was of course standard practice across the ancient world. As far as they were concerned, their stance went along with the traditional ancient Jewish and Christian belief in life as a gift from God, which is why (for instance) they refused to follow the ubiquitous pagan practice of ‘exposing’ baby girls (i.e. leaving them out for the wolves or for slave-traders to pick up).
Mind you, there is in my view just as illogical a position on the part of those who solidly oppose the death penalty but are very keen on the ‘right’ of a woman (or couple) to kill their conceived but not yet born child....

UCC Pastor, the Rev. Susan K. Smith of Columbus, OH says that for Perry, some lives are more precious than others.

There seems to be a cloud that hovers over America that rains down drops of racism; the Frontline piece suggests that executions are an extension of the tendency of the South (and Texas is part of the deep South) to lynch “outsiders.”
In other words, the life of an African American, even if innocent, is not as precious as the life of an unborn fetus. Lynching has become state-sanctioned, a way to purge society of its “untouchables” far too often.

Perry said that “life is a precious gift from God,” but clearly, he only means some life. The life of a perhaps innocent person who is executed is not so precious, if I understand his philosophy.

That is a sad commentary on the American justice system, and Perry’s touting and boasting of his state’s record on executions is a sad commentary on what “life” is to him.

Certainly, it would seem, that in his world, a life such as mine or my children’s does not matter much at all.

Comments (11)

If a hypocrite wearing ear plugs falls over while alone in the woods, does it make a sound? I find it hard to believe that a good portion of the folks who stand against a woman's right to choose and for the death penalty are not aware of the inherent contradiction in their positions. Here in Ohio, the Roman Catholic Bishops just got around (this year) to suggesting to the State that it consider ending its use of capital punishment and have applauded a decision by the State's Chief Justice in which she called for a review of its use. While I think this is all really great, I have to wonder why the good Bishops took so long to formally and directly act. It certainly wasn't because there was any ambiguity from their boss -- at least the earthly one. Something changed that had nothing at all to do with their theological perspective. I'd love to have a chance to offer a high five to whomever facilitated that change.

Posted by Howard Parr | September 16, 2011 8:54 PM

From where I sit, it is inconceivable that anyone would be able to hold both of these two (conflicting)opinions, but they do and they don't seem to feel that they are mutually exclusive. From my conversations with "Pro-Life" folks the reasoning goes this way: babies are innocent and adult criminals are not. I consider myself pro-life, but pro-life on every front. Maybe it's simplistic but I believe that you are either you are FOR LIFE or you are not.

Posted by Peter Pearson | September 16, 2011 9:39 PM

Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite has it right - the positions are not contradictory if you look at the proponents - they are about control - nothing to do with life. Control of society and women -- in their minds both purveyors of chaos.

Posted by Ann Fontaine | September 16, 2011 9:49 PM

If the distinction (in some Christians' minds) is based upon "innocent" vs "guilty" human life, there's another irony: the widespread Christian belief in Original Sin! [i.e., if "life begins at conception", then so does the stain of Adam's Guilt]

Mind you, there is in my view just as illogical a position on the part of those who solidly oppose the death penalty but are very keen on the ‘right’ of a woman (or couple) to kill their conceived but not yet born child....

Can't Wright see that, while the Christian belief against capital punishment is ancient, the (tendentious) notion of a "conceived but not yet born child" is not?

Yes, yes, yes: the Didache condemns abortion. But that would have been understood as abortion after "quickening" (first movement of the fetus), not at "conception" (of which ancients had NO idea!)

I know I've yammered on this before (I did it again at Thinking Angligans a couple of days ago): "human life" MUST mean something more than Homo sapiens DNA in cell-division. If human beings are the Image of God, then it must ONLY be because we have God's essential "I Am Who I Am" quality of sentience...

...which even the WORST mass murderer has (Yes he does, Rick Perry!). And first trimester human embryo does NOT have (No it doesn't, Tom!)

I realize that, by being (proudly!) Pro-Choice on abortion, and Anti-Death penalty, I'm bassackwards from most (US) Americans. But, as a Christian, aren't I supposed to be counter-cultural?

JC Fisher

Posted by tgflux | September 17, 2011 1:42 AM

Can't you all just be in favor of the elective killing of unborn children-- sorry, fetuses-- without impugning the motives of pro-life folks?

Howard, I'd love to high-five whoever can convince all the Episcopal bishops in Ohio to get consistent on their anti-death penalty position and publicly condemn the killing of unborn children.

JC Fisher, Do you really think the ancients had no idea about conception? When in the world did people figure that out? Like the 1900s or something?

Bill Ledbetter

Posted by William Ledbetter | September 17, 2011 2:15 AM

Thistlethwaite's position herself as a person of some authority doesn't do much for my consideration of her thesis. And at any rate, civil law is, after all, about applying power to morality.

I don't think it is honest to take the caricatures of the two positions and pit them against each other, nor is it good policy or politics if you are a Christian. It seems to me that there could be some sort of public position worked out that conceded the right to early abortion while condemning the more egregious later cases. And it seems to me that as long as absolute permission to kill the unborn is tied to absolute opposition to capital punishment, there is no chance at all of any advance other than the kind of scorched earth politics popular now. I'm sorry, but it is not possible to defend killing the unwanted in favor of letting the murderous live. Original sin isn't going to get you out of that one.

Posted by C. Wingate | September 17, 2011 9:02 AM

I would say it is about control, but particularly in the form of certainty; the unwillingness to live with ambiguity -- an inner weakness that is projected out in all sorts of ways. The point of reconciliation of the two apparently dissonant beliefs lies in the certainty that life begins at conception and that certain criminals are absolutely guilty and deserve the ultimate penalty. It isn't really about "life" as such, or its alleged sanctity, but the certainty that "innocent" life must be protected at all costs, and "guilty" life must be ended. This view brooks no uncertainty either about the beginning of life or the guilt of the criminal.

Posted by tobias haller | September 17, 2011 10:35 AM

Let me add that I agree with C Wingate that the opposite position is equally based at least in part on a flight from ambiguity, and an equal kind of certainty that the fetus is _not_ the equal of a human being. Easy answers to hard questions are not usually right.

Posted by tobias haller | September 17, 2011 10:41 AM

JC Fisher is absolutely right.

And I also agree that the flight from ambiguity is the hallmark of extreme conservatives and fundamentalists. It is strange too that many in the pro-life movement call abortion murder, call for the death penalty for murder, but never call for a woman who performs her own abortion to be given the death penalty. It seems they don't even believe their own rhetoric.

But a larger inconsistency appears when discussing what to do with people after they are born. Anyone want to bet that the people who shouted in approval at the Repbulican debate that those without insurance should be left to die would also declare themselves pro-life? All too often the pro-life movement is simply "pro-birth". Force women to bring children into the world against their will, then to heck with them seems to be the pro-life stance.

[Editor's note: Thanks for the comment. Please leave us your full name next time.]

Posted by Dallas Bob | September 17, 2011 1:18 PM

The death penalty is a violation of human rights that has no place in a democratic society. I agree with Spong (above)with regard to the opinions of religious people on social controversy. However, the Catechism of the Catholic Church supports the use of the death penalty (# 2266).

Posted by Rod Gillis | September 17, 2011 1:53 PM

Google "homunculus", Bill L, and get back to me.

Posted by tgflux | September 17, 2011 3:05 PM

Add your comments

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

Reminder: At Episcopal Café, we hope to establish an ethic of transparency by requiring all contributors and commentators to make submissions under their real names. For more details see our Feedback Policy.

Name:

Email Address:

URL:

Remember personal info?

Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)

CATEGORIES

Organizations