Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 9 years ago

Are there any pro life anti death penalty (democrat or republican) politicians in congress?

If so, who?

5 Answers

Relevance
  • 9 years ago
    Best Answer

    Sam Brownbeck, Republican, is pro life and anti-death penalty except in "extreme" cases. He has said that the death penalty is inconsistent with a "consistent ethic" of life.

    A few others that I know of: Rep. Thomas Brinkman Jr. (R-Cincinnati), Jim Trakas (R-Cleveland), Sen. Mark James (R-Las Vegas), Del. Frank D. Hargrove Sr., (R-Hanover), Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Michigan)

    A Catholic blog has the following representatives listed:

    Boren, Dan, Oklahoma, Bright, Bobby, Alabama, Childers, Travis, Mississippi, Costello, Jerry, Illinois, Davis, Lincoln, Tennessee, Donnelly, Joe, Indiana, Ellsworth, Brad, Indiana, Griffith, Parker, Alabama, Lipinski, Daniel, Illinois, Marshall, Jim, Georgia, McIntyre, Mike, North Carolina, Melancon, Charlie, Louisiana, Mollohan, Alan B., West Virginia, Peterson, Collin C., Minnesota, Shuler, Heath, North Carolina, Skelton, Ike, Missouri, Taylor, Gene, Mississippi, Wilson, Charles A., Ohio.

    If you think about it, conservatives (proponents of "small government") should be the most likely folks to oppose the death penalty because it is a huge huge huge imposition of the government into the lives of civilians, deciding who lives and who dies.

    Source(s): Equal Justice, USA, The Catholic Key Blog, The Death Penalty Information Center
  • 3 years ago

    i'm greater in contact as to why there's a extreme loss of ANY representation in Congress in any respect. Corrupt politicians passing law against the will of the people, making delivers they by no ability save, talking enormous on television then doing the alternative whilst we're not observing. attempting to attach riders for BS rules on law on the final 2nd, taking people out of context and flat out mendacity to the yank people And the Beaver for sure hasn't saved up on modern-day activities. The prevailing social gathering of Roe vs Wade no longer too some time past made a public fact that the proper to abortion subject became right into a travesty and became into ashamed to have been a factor of the ordeal. in fact, people basically prefer to do what they choose, and whilst they grow previous and wiser, they comprehend they have been incorrect and egocentric. no longer that i could assume a liberal to truthfully admit that aloud. This BS needs to offer up.

  • 9 years ago

    probably.

    The death penalty as pro life

    Dudley Sharp

    First, the "pro life" term was, originally, identified with the anti abortion movement, which still seems the most appropriate context.

    Secondly, in the context of the facts, yes, of course you can be pro life and pro death penalty. There is no contradicition.

    All sanctions are given because we value what is being taken away.

    Whether is be fines, freedom or lives, in every case we take things away, as legal sanction, it is because we value that which is taken away.

    How can it be a sanction, if we do not value that which is taken away? It can't.

    In addition, more innocent lives are saved when we use the death penalty, thereby a pro life benefit.

    Deterrence

    All prospects of a negative outcome deter some. It is a truism. The death penalty, the most severe of criminal sanctions, is the least likely of all criminal sanctions to violate that truism.

    "The Death Penalty: More Protection for Innocents"

    http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/05/the-death-...

    25 recent studies finding for deterrence, Criminal Justice Legal Foundation,

    http://www.cjlf.org/deathpenalty/DPDeterrence.htm

    "Deterrence and the Death Penalty: A Reply to Radelet and Lacock"

    http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/02/deterrence...

    "Death Penalty, Deterrence & Murder Rates: Let's be clear"

    http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/03/death-penalt...

    We have great care for innocents

    In at least three ways, innocents are more protected with the death penalty, than with lesser sanctions. Another pro life consideration.

    "The Death Penalty: More Protection for Innocents"

    http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/05/the-death-...

    The false innocence claims by anti death penalty activists are legendary. Some examples:

    "The Innocent Executed: Deception & Death Penalty Opponents"

    http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/10/08/the-innoce...

    The 130 (now 139) death row "innocents" scam

    http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/03/04/fact-check...

    "A Death Penalty Red Herring: The Inanity and Hypocrisy of Perfection", Lester Jackson Ph.D.,

    http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=102909A

    The moral and religious arguments, in support of the death penalty, all have a foundation in respecting innocent life, therefore, when it is wrongly taken away, the highest form of sanction is provided.

    As in:

    Genesis 9:5-6: "For your lifeblood I will surely require a reckoning.... Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for God made man in his own image."

    Chapter V:The Sanctity of Life, "Principles of Conduct: Aspects of Biblical Ethics" By John Murray, 1991 (first published 1957) by Wm. B. Eerdmans http://tiny.cc/4SFBY

    "Death Penalty Support: Religious and Secular Scholars"

    http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/07/death-penalt...

  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    I think Joe Lieberman.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 9 years ago

    The only one I know that is against both is Ron Paul.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.