Streff 1 Alexander Streff Dr.

Erin Dietel-McLauglin WR 13300 11 November 2012 The Argument for a Unified Pro-Life Community At a very young age, I learned about the death penalty and the consequences for crimes of incredible scale. My parents, strict Republicans from rural Minnesota, always taught me that this eye for an eye approach to our nations crime problem was a fair and just solution. Years later, I was sitting in Mass at my local Catholic church as the priest discussed the issue of abortion. I had absolutely no clue what this was at the time and later that evening, my father stopped by my room to explain to me the issue of abortion and why it is so important to protect life from conception to natural death. For years, these two beliefs lived firmly in my head as the correct way to look at life in America. I believed that we should protect those innocent lives yet to be born, while putting to death those who cause our society the most pain. In the last two years, my story has evolved dramatically. One day, I deeply contemplated my beliefs before giving a speech to hundreds of people. I realized that I can make absolutely no argument for the death penalty while arguing that abortion should be banned at all costs. I also realized that the conservative community as a whole cannot make an argument opposed to abortion while still being in favor of the death penalty. My speech came and for the first time in my life, I publicly spoke against capital punishment even for those who commit despicable crimes against humanity. That day, my views on life were changed forever. I was motivated to learn more on the issue and further my research.

Streff 2 There clearly is disunity in how Republicans and conservatives stand on the issue of respecting and protecting life. The Republican Partys 2012 platform speaks very extensively on abortion, condemning use of abortion in foreign countries, calling for restrictions on current abortion, defunding all abortion providers and ultimately appointing judges who will stand up for unborn life. However, the same document also favors allowing courts to reserve the right to punish someone with the death penalty in capital murder cases. This aspect of the platform is preceded by a call for more life imprisonment for those who commit grave crimes, but the language regarding capital punishment still exists very clearly. It is important to note that this is just what the party officially believes. In order to fully understand this issue, we must look to those who make up the party. Gallup Incorporated, a reliable and unbiased research institute, has conducted polls on both abortion and capital punishment opinions that are very relevant to this discussion. According to these studies, 70% of those who identify as Republicans are also prolife. The similar Gallup study on capital punishment finds that 78% of Republicans are in favor of using the death penalty as a punishment for murder. It is more than evident that the Republican Party, and the conservative individuals who comprise it, are not unified in their beliefs to protect life from conception until natural death. This discrepancy in beliefs regarding life is a problem. It is imperative that the Republican Party and those conservatives who identify with its principles form a stance that truly values every life, regardless of innocence. It is important to note that this paper will not speak merely on the immorality of Capital Punishment, but on the relationship between this and abortion. I intend to reconsider conservative values and determine whether they truly do support the killing of our nations guilty, compare the deaths of our most innocent through abortion with

Streff 3 the killing of the guiltiest through capital punishment, and establish why our unity and consistency on these issues are so vital. Conservatives often tout their support of life from conception to natural death. As laid out previously, the ways in which they apply these values is far from the core values that drive them. The desire to protect the innocent and unborn is very strong in this community and deserves respect. However, these same conservatives often argue that in order to keep society safe, execution must be left on the table as a means of punishing those who cause pain to the innocent victims of heinous acts of violence. The longer that I consider this, the more obvious it seems that conservative principles are not in line with the Republican Partys current stance on Capital Punishment. The all important question to ask is, does the government ever have the right to take the life of a human being? The answer to this is very complex. Many argue that in the interest of safety of the public, the government does have the right to take an individuals life. But these circumstances are not Capital Punishment; they are often split second decisions by law enforcement officers when other options have been taken off the table. In every case of Capital Punishment, the subject is not currently a threat to society as our prison system has the individual in full control. Philosophical author Robert Hutchinson is against Capital Punishment for what he calls the most conservative of reasons. He writes, I dont believe any government should have the authority to take human life, at least not in a society, such as ours, that has the resources to build prisons. This truly is a conservative belief that the government should not be given the power to extend into the business of killing individuals. Many conservatives believe that it is the duty of the government to protect citizens from harms way at all costs. Here is where we find the flaw in the thinking of many conservatives today. The point at which the goal of protecting society

Streff 4 has been accomplished is when that individual is no longer a source of threat to anyone. Today, that means the individual could be in a solitary confinement cell, completely secluded from those whose lives he threatens. An execution is an overreach of the governments duty to protect due to the strength of our current prison system. An argument for Capital Punishment was a much stronger argument for conservatives when the prison system was not capable of ensuring that no escapes would occur. When some conservatives argue that Capital Punishment must be used, that is the conservative voice of years ago speaking, no longer relevant to our culture. As we do with other aspects of government, conservatives should push that the government does not overreach the necessary steps to fix problems. Capital Punishment is not a conservative value of today, it is an archaic conservative value of years ago. The Catholic Catechism sums up this conservative belief that Capital Punishment is no longer necessary when safety can be ensured in a way that is not exclusive to members of the Catholic Church: Assuming that the guilty partys identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor. If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect peoples safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person. (604-605) For the same reasons that we conservatives oppose abortion, it is imperative that we also oppose Capital Punishment. I concede that it is nearly morally impossible to put the killing of the

Streff 5 most innocent in society and the guiltiest on the same playing field. However, in order to examine the issue, our minds must be clear of this disturbing difference. The reason that we are against abortion likely varies by individual; however, it is likely fair to assume that each one of us has a respect for the dignity of human life as a part of our core argument. Some argue that this dignity is lost when one takes the life of another. But is this dignity really lost? In order to answer this question, again we must return to our core convictions that we as conservatives hold so tightly to our hearts. We are the ones who wave such ideas as dignity for all human life around when we discuss abortion. Must we not follow suit when it comes to a different human life? We often quote the Declaration of Independences three unalienable rights, endowed on us by our Creator, the first of these being life (Dec. of Ind. Paragraph 2). But yet, in general, we are the ones who push for more stringent capital punishment laws around the country. We suddenly ignore this human dignity that is such a cornerstone in our argument against abortion. Frankly, this sudden failure to recognize human dignity is quite ignorant of our conservative community. Through reasoned definition of the phrase human dignity itself, it cannot be taken away from an individual, regardless of any circumstances. Pope John Paul II was quoted by the website for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops saying, The dignity of human life must never be taken away, even in the case of someone who has done great evil. Modern society has the means of protecting itself, without definitively denying criminals the chance to reform.1 Intrinsically, human dignity is not something that can be taken away

The reason for including such a large number of Catholic sources is due to the fact that the Catholic Church is a leader in the fight for consistency with regards to life. In no way does it endorse the idea that these beliefs must be held because of religious doctrine. Rather, these sources provide well-reasoned thought on the matter with very little regard to the religion.

Streff 6 regardless of circumstances. However, limiting ones rights to protect the dignity of others is a very different situation, one that ultimately saves lives. Indeed, the argument against abortion and the argument against the death penalty are parallel ones. It is irrational to accept the dignity of unborn life but deny that of those who harm our society. Although it seems that they have lost all rights as human beings, they have not. As conservatives who tout our respect for life, we must now continue this journey of respect to those who seem to deserve none. Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life expressed this comparison between abortion and capital punishment perfectly, saying, God bless all who fight the death penalty; God bless all who fight abortion. Let's work together, convinced that even one death, whether by abortion or capital punishment, is one too many. Finally, a shift against Capital Punishment strengthens the argument against abortion that we hold so dearly. No longer can an inconsistency even be pointed to. The absolute strongest argument that can be made in ending abortion forever is to oppose the death penalty, even at the cost of being accused of switching sides. The argument that this shift will strengthen the fight against abortion is quite strong and hard to articulate; however, I plan to expand on it as much as possible. Imagine that you have never heard of neither the death penalty nor abortion. A good friend approaches you and tries to convince you that abortion is fundamentally wrong and should not be legal in order to protect all human life. He then attempts to convince you that in every case of murder, the death penalty should be left on the table as an option. What are the chances that you accept this argument? Many would struggle with the fact that these human lives are not valued equally. This scenario points to the flaw that our community is faced with every time this argument is made. The cases for each part of our philosophy push the other down. Strong

Streff 7 positions in opposition to both forms of murder uphold each other like regal bookends on the shelf of a study. In an article in America Magazine, James Kelly wrote about this unification in regard to the Catholic Church and the strength of the argument that they have made. [T]here are at least some empirical grounds to think that were a consistent ethic of life to receive more attention in the churches and elsewhere, the connection between opposing abortion and the death penalty would contribute to the sense of human solidarity that all authentically progressive movements require for their incremental growth. This human solidarity mentioned by Kelly is something that must be embraced in this fight for the protection of all lives. Without it, we are fighting for a lost idea, one which is torn down and discredited by our other beliefs. It is time that we as conservatives unite as the true voice for human life in America. We have spearheaded the fight against abortion, one that is far from over. It is now time that we spearhead the fight against capital punishment. It truly is in our conservative roots to do so. We oppose overextension of the government into our free lives, the most important aspect being our very right to live. In a similar way, we must extend our human dignity argument to capital punishment as it truly is a human life in need of respect regardless of innocence. This transition in our party and among the people who hold our values will be a challenge. In order to accomplish the shift, a massive change in our party and ideological group as a whole must occur. When we thrust full force into this issue, our view on Capital Punishment will be quite aligned with the Democratic Party that often pushes to end this practice. This alignment is not something to fear, but rather embrace. Admitting fault and embracing unification will, without a doubt, place our party in a very credible and innovative position on issues of life. We must be the ones with the strength to admit this fault, reach to those who are already against

Streff 8 capital punishment, credit them for standing in opposition to this barbaric practice, and unify our argument, truly embracing human life from conception to natural death. Then, and only then, may we call ourselves upholders of human dignity.

Streff 9 Works Cited "2012 Republican Platform." GOP. Republican National Committee, 2012. Web. 01 Nov. 2012. <http://www.gop.com/2012-republican-platform_home/>. Catechism of the Catholic Church. New York: Doubleday, 1995. Print. Gallup Incorporated. "In U.S., 64% Support Death Penalty in Cases of Murder." In U.S., 64% Support Death Penalty in Cases of Murder. Gallup, 8 Nov. 2010. Web. 29 Oct. 2012. <http://www.gallup.com/poll/144284/Support-Death-Penalty-Cases-Murder.aspx>. Gallup Incorporated. "More Americans "Pro-Life" Than "Pro-Choice" for First Time." More Americans "Pro-Life" Than "Pro-Choice" for First Time. Gallup, 15 May 2009. Web. 29 Oct. 2012. <http://www.gallup.com/poll/118399/More-Americans-Pro-Life-Than-ProChoice-First-Time.aspx>. Hutchinson, Robert. "The Conservative Case Against the Death Penalty." Catholic Exchange. Catholic Exchange, 9 Oct. 2012. Web. 03 Nov. 2012. <http://catholicexchange.com/theconservative-case-against-the-death-penalty/>. Kelly, James R. "Pro-Life, Anti-Death Penalty?" Comp. Christopher Kudlac. America Magazine. America Press Inc., 1 Apr. 2000. Web. 01 Nov. 2012. <http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=650>. Pavone, Fr. Frank. "Capital Punishment and Abortion." Capital Punishment and Abortion. Priests for Life. Web. 01 Nov. 2012. <http://www.priestsforlife.org/columns/column9908-16capitalpunishment.htm>.

Streff 10 Pope John Paul, II. "Death Penalty / Capital Punishment." Death Penalty / Capital Punishment. United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 1995. Web. 07 Nov. 2012. <http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/death-penalty-capitalpunishment/>.