abortion vs the death penalty

Is President Bush really pro-life?

Published on October 19, 2004 By Winterblade In Politics

I find it ironic that President Bush is anti-abortion (pro-life) when so many people were executed (sentenced to death) in Texas under his watch. What makes that convict any less deserving to llive than an unborn child? Here's some facts I googled.

from http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/drowfacts.htm

When capital punishment was declared "cruel and unusual punishment" by the U.S. Supreme Court on June 29, 1972, there were 45 men on death row in Texas and 7 in county jails with a death sentence. All of the sentences were commuted to life sentences by the Governor of Texas, and death row was clear by March 1973.

In 1973, revision to the Texas Penal Code once again allowed assessment of the death penalty and allowed for executions to resume effective 1/1/1974.

Texas leads nation in the number of executions since death penalty was reinstated in 1976.

--

President Bush was governor of Texas from January 17, 1995 to December 21, 2000.

Executions during 1995 in the state of Texas: 19 [http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/cp95.txt]
1996 3 [http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/cp96.txt]
1997 37 [http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/cp97.txt]
1998 20 [http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/cp98.txt]
1999 35 [http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/cp99.txt[
2000 40 [http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/cp00.txt]

For a grand total of 154

This is only those that were executed, not those who were sentenced. It is also a known fact that Texas is a state that allows the sentencing of juveniles to execution.

Comments

Dr Guy

on Oct 19, 2004

For a practicing Catholic, both Abortion and the Death Penalty are morally wrong. However, as pointed out before, Bush is not a Catholic, and is not bound by their beliefs. ANd while Bush was Governor of Texas, many were put to death, the simple fact is that he had very little control over who was put on death row and who was executed.

Yes, he could have commuted the sentences, but then the alarm would be sounded that he was bucking the will of the people. So it was a no win situatiuon on his part. Indeed, in almost all instances of the death penalty, the executive has little or no control over the issue, but must obey the law, just like every common folk has to.

I doubt anyone on any forum would argue that Governor Mark Warner is a pro death penalty advocate, yet he has not stopped a single execution in his state in his 3 years in office (3rd only to Texas and Fla in those put to death).

As I am an opponent of Warners, would I use that against him? No, because it is a non-issue. I am against him for other substantive reasons.

If you dont like the law, change it. Dont advocate breaking a law you dont like. That only leads to anarchy.

T_Bone4Justice

on Oct 19, 2004

"the simple fact is that he had very little control over who was put on death row and who was executed."

True and not true. While Bush had no control of the judicial process he could have stayed any or all of these executions as Governor.

Another interesting fact you might be interested in Winterblade, while Bush was still Governor of Texas during the 2000 campaign, he refused to stay the execution of a mentally retarded person who's attorney begged G. W. Bush for his client's life. Not wanting to look "soft" on the death penalty during the campaign, he allowed this mentally deficient person to be executed. Nice.

T_Bone4Justice

on Oct 19, 2004

"he could have commuted the sentences, but then the alarm would be sounded that he was bucking the will of the people."

Well, considering that he is anti-abortion and will most certainly place Supreme Court Justices on the court who will try to overturn Roe v. Wade, inspite of the majority in this country being Pro-choice, does not lend support to your assertion that Bush is concerned with the "will of the people." He's interested in political expediency and shoring up his base.

drmiler

on Oct 19, 2004

Reply #2 By: T_Bone4Justice - 10/19/2004 10:12:08 AM
"the simple fact is that he had very little control over who was put on death row and who was executed."

True and not true. While Bush had no control of the judicial process he could have stayed any or all of these executions as Governor.

Did you miss the second part of his reply?

Yes, he could have commuted the sentences, but then the alarm would be sounded that he was bucking the will of the people. So it was a no win situatiuon on his part. Indeed, in almost all instances of the death penalty, the executive has little or no control over the issue, but must obey the law, just like every common folk has to.

And like the man said, Bush ain't catholic so what's the beef?

MythicalMino

on Oct 19, 2004

the difference between abortion and capital punishement is that the unborn being aborted haven't done anything yet to deserve death.....the folks that die due to capital punishment on the other hand, well, they have.....or at least it was determined in a court of their peers that they were guilty....

messybuu

on Oct 19, 2004

Abortion is to capital punishment as kidnapping is to incarceration. Incarceration, like kidnapping, is somebody taken against their will and confined to a cell. Does that mean incarceration is wrong, since it's just like kidnapping, except "justified?"

QingJao

on Oct 19, 2004

I love how no one points out that liberals think its okay to kill an innocent fetus but not a killer.

Winterblade

on Oct 19, 2004

QingJao: That has been pointed out in one of the front page articles.

As for commuting the executions. It seems GW never gave it more than 15 minutes thought.

Messy: True. Point taken. I would think that to an openly religious man (GW), that death would be death.

Some may say they're protecting the defenseless. Aren't convicted felons who are about to be executed made defenseless?

And what makes that mentally disabled person any different from an innocent fetus? I don't know the specifics of the case, but did the executed know the difference between wrong and right?

drmiler

on Oct 19, 2004

Reply #8 By: Winterblade - 10/19/2004 2:43:36 PM
As for commuting the executions. It seems GW never gave it more than 15 minutes thought.

And you know this for a fact? Can you back this up with *fact*?

citahellion

on Oct 19, 2004

Aren't convicted felons who are about to be executed made defenseless?

It's extremely disingenuous to ignore the years of court cases, the lawyerly battling, the appeals, the judicial review, etc., etc. that all take place on the felon's behalf before the felon is scheduled for execution.

what makes that mentally disabled person any different from an innocent fetus?

Oh, I dunno, the fact that he was convicted of a capital crime?
I don't know the specifics of the case either, but I presume that the law was followed and that he was found to be functional enough to stand trial.

messybuu

on Oct 19, 2004

Some may say they're protecting the defenseless. Aren't convicted felons who are about to be executed made defenseless?

Only if they're crippled.

And what makes that mentally disabled person any different from an innocent fetus? I don't know the specifics of the case, but did the executed know the difference between wrong and right?

That's what they could find out during the trials.

latour999

on Oct 21, 2004

I think W also became the only Governor the ever execute a Canadian (not 100% sure, he might be the 2nd). I find it ironic that in a race between Kerry (who opposes the death penalty (or at least in '96)) and the Texecutioner, this has not become an issue. Plus, I find it ironic that such a deeply religious man like W has racked up an apalling 154 executions. Doesn't the 6th commandment say something about not killing people or something to that effect?

Mitch21

on Oct 21, 2004

I love how no one points out that liberals think its okay to kill an innocent fetus but not a killer.

how true

Plus, I find it ironic that such a deeply religious man like W has racked up an apalling 154 executions.

and I wonder how many of those 154 deserved it.... id say around 154, just guessing. And read the quote from QuingJao.

Grim Xiozan

on Oct 21, 2004

Plus, I find it ironic that such a deeply religious man like W has racked up an apalling 154 executions.

Did you know the average cell time people serve on Death row in Texas is about 17 years?

Do we just overthrow the will of the people whenever religion suits us, and than throw religion out in favor of the law when the law is what we agree with?

Last time I checked everybody goes to court, there is a jury of peers who ultimately decide whether you are guilty or innocent and if found guilty whether you deserve the death penalty or not, should Bush have gone against the law to enforce a religious ideal he did not possess?

Ever heard of balance of power? Don't mess with the courts period unless there is a valid reason given to the Governor by the defendant's lawyers or by the D.A.

Law is the Law, and if you want to change the law you change the people who make the laws, the Legislative Branch not the Executive Branch (who enforces the law).

The Judicial Branch will do nothing because their only mission is to interpret the law and to make sure the law abides by the State and Federal Constitution.

*Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzt*

- Grim X

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!