November 13th issue, page 33 (sorry no link; I looked but alas could not find) Where They Stand In the last 30 years, the evangelical population has grown significantly. By and large, they fall on the right, but some do favor certain liberal stances. Percentage of evangelicals who agree with the following statements (2006): 60.3% The United States was justified in entering Iraq. 75.3% Abortion because the family cannot afford the child is always wrong. 79.8% The government should not abolish the death penalty. 85.4% The government should allow prayer in schools. Now talk amongst yourselves
That death penalty stance is the one that always confused me. So state sanctioned murder is bad (abortion) but ok with capital punishment. Also endorsing capital punishment also endorses the idea that there is such a thing as just or acceptable murder, which also underpins the logic of abortion.
Well - look at this way. Religious zealots love to kill those they view unlike them. Islamic fundamentalists oppress women and vow to kill their enemies. So do the Christian ones.
I agree. I don't think many evangelicals have thought it out and applied biblical principle to it. While I don't consider it murder, it is vengeance, and as Christians we are taught to leave vengeance to God. I think many death penalty proponents think that the death penalty is necessary for a "strong on crime" stance. If we could separate those issues, we'd probably eliminate the death penalty in this country.
While im not an advocate of the death penalty, let me point out two things you fail to see: abortion for a baby who has no choice in the matter is COMPLETELY different than a guy who goes on a killing spree. No comparison between the two. Try again. Most people who are against the death penalty would change their stance if they had someone close hacked to death by some psycho. Personally, unless the person gives an admission of guilt and knowing they will receive the death penalty, and/or are a future threat, then I feel they should not be executed regardless. Under no circumstance should a person be executed if they agree to live out their life productively.
The evangelicals are a God send for this country, imo. The people that built this country and made it great were Christians, and religion has always played a significant role in their lives. Now they might not have been hardcore fanatics but if they had to take sides between the commie, religion-hating liberals or the Christian right, we all know what they would choose. I wouldn't call it justified but shyt happens. Late term abortions are just straight up crazy. I agree. We allow drugs, violence, sex, and bullying to literally go unchecked in many school systems but once the issue of prayer comes up then these liberals say,"Oh no!!! What a travesty!!!!!!" Where is the logic in that?
Of course there's a difference. I'm not pretending to think otherwise. And I generally hold my opposition to the death penalty on practical grounds. (It's more expensive than life in prison, executing innocent people, etc..) rather than philosophical grounds. But I fail to see how the two are totally exclusive of each other. Evangelicals accuse pro-choice activists of rationalizing murder. The same applies to the death penalty. It is rationalized murder. Now you can argue that the rational for the death penalty is much more understandable but it nonetheless is a rationalization of state sanctioned murder. Point being, supporting a rationalized example of murder engages in the same underlying logic that philosophically justifies abortion and that is what I find problematic. So when pro-life advocates take this position of moral superiority because they oppose all forms of murder, they are being somewhat hypocritical by supporting capital punishment. This of course only indicts the philosophical reasoning behind the pro-life movement but nonetheless its an argument that is cited quite often. The Vatican for example, opposes the death penalty and abortion, which seems much more consistent.
On philosophical grounds, does the same inconsistency apply to those who agree with abortion yet oppose the death penalty for moral reasons?
Both sets of views claim moral superiority. Just wanted to see if you applied the same reasoning to both sides.
Not necessarily. if one doesn’t view an aborted fetus as the ending of human life then there is not the same inconsistency
I can't speak for the statistics, but Ross Byrd did the opposite. http://www.justiceandhumanity.com/rossbyrd.html
Most people who are against abortion would change their minds if that waitress who they "seeing" on the down low becomes pregnant. BTW killing is OK as long as you think there is a 95% chance that "they had it coming"? We do know for a fact that some people have been put to death that were later cleared via DNA (thus, the 95% reference above).
I don't know about this particular poll, but typically, it's self-described evangelicals. That's why if you asked the same poll of church-goers to "evangelical" churches, you get a more centrist view.
I am guessing that Newsweek counted those people in the poll, who would self-describe themselves as evangelists. You might not have made the cut
I'd call myself an evangelical. I know screaming liberals who consider themselves evangelical. It's not a political statement. At least not how I define it.
Yeah, the horrible Drug, Violence, Sex, and Bullying law of 1968. Ever since then, our schools have sucked. Shouldn't 100% of the surveyed believe that prayer should be "allowed" in schools since it already is? Max - I know you are being a bit coy, but evangelical almost always refers to conservative (religiously) Protestant Christians who believe in active evangelism and conversion.
i'm suggesting it hasn't always meant that. i'm suggesting it's a hijacked term. sorta like christian. i'm not happy about that. what's active evangelism?? i think i'm an active evangelist. i'm trying to be. but again, i'm guessing you're defining that differently than i would.
