Some people argue that if someone is pro-life with respect to the unborn, by the same logic they should also be opposed to capital punishment. If a pro-life supporter opposes abortion but not capital punishment, these detractors claim they are being hypocritical, or worse yet, that such inconsistency serves to undermine the pro-life ethic. This is often called the seamless garment argument. It is advanced by both abortion-choice and pro-life advocates alike (pro-life advocates who are opposed to both abortion and capital punishment).
A couple of things could be said in response. First, even if the pro-life ethic demanded that one be opposed to both abortion and capital punishment, the pro-life ethic would not be undermined merely because someone inconsistently applies that ethic. An individual’s logical inconsistencies do not dictate truth. Even if the pro-lifer is logically inconsistent, it could still be the case that the pro-life ethic is true, and thus abortion is wrong. The abortion-choice advocate would be committing a logical blunder himself if he thinks that the pro-lifer’s logical inconsistency in applying the pro-life ethic is itself evidence that the pro-life ethic is false. His conclusion is non-sequitur.
Second, the seamless garment argument misunderstands the nature of the pro-life ethic. “Pro-life” does not mean we are opposed to taking the life of anything and everybody. It means we are opposed to the unjust taking of innocent human life, or murder (as opposed to mere killing). To argue that consistency of the pro-life ethic demands that one oppose capital punishment as well as abortion confuses guilt with innocence. The unborn are innocent human beings who possess the right to life; murderers are guilty human beings who have forfeited their right to life by unjustly taking the life of another human being. To kill an innocent and defenseless human being in the womb is an unjust taking of life, while killing those who are guilty of unjustly robbing others of their right to life is the just taking of life. “The right to life is not an absolute; it can be forfeited. This moral right is only prima facie; it stands only until challenged by some greater law, like justice or protecting the lives of the innocent.”[1]
Let me turn the tables for a minute. Some pro-life advocates will use the seamless garment argument against those who support abortion rights but not capital punishment. They will argue that if one is opposed to capital punishment because it takes the life of a human being, then logically they should be opposed to abortion as well. If they aren’t, then at best they are being inconsistent, and at worst this undermines their pro-abortion position. But this need not be the case. Someone who supports abortion rights but not capital punishment is not being inconsistent if he believes the right to life is based on being a person, and that the unborn are not persons. The murderer is a person and thus should not be killed, but the unborn is not a person yet and thus can be.[2] I don’t agree with these presuppositions, but it does demonstrate that one can be opposed to capital punishment without simultaneously opposing abortion, and be logically consistent in doing so.
[1]Greg Koukl, “The Bible and Capital Punishment”; available from http://www.str.org/free/studies/capipuni.htm; Internet, accessed 20 January 2005.
[2]See http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2009/10/abortion-death-penalty-and-charge-of.html for a short treatment of this idea.
Thinking to Believe 
March 19, 2010 at 2:47 pm
The law of this world versus the law of God’s Kingdom.
I find it difficult to consider favoring, opposing and even actively pursuing a death sentence on anyone that is a follower of Jesus. I’m surprised that in 2010 that’s an extreme position.
Societies need laws. They even need punishments. Let them have that. But for Jesus followers to execute fatal judgement – I scratch my head and wonder how they can separate the two. We are all guilty. For the protection of society, remove them and incarcerate, try to rehabilitate (not just throwing people away), but to promote death seems anti-Christ.
I don’t try to connect the dots to abortion, but I think it’s certainly consistent to say if one is “pro-life” then they are preservation of life generally — both the so-called innocent and the guilty.
LikeLike
March 19, 2010 at 4:11 pm
Jake,
Why do you assume that capital punishment is the law of this world, rather than of God’s kingdom? Is God not the one who instituted the practice? God’s command to Noah was not, “And whosoever sheds man’s blood, by man shall he be imprisoned,” but rather “by man shall his blood be shed.”
And you can’t pit this as an OT vs. NT issue, for two reasons: (1) The NT also supports the practice in Romans 13; (2) Jesus is God incarnate, so Jesus is the one who instituted capital punishment.
I find it a strange view of Christianity to think that judgment is “anti-Christ” when Christ is the Judge who will ultimately kill both body and soul in hell. As judge, God has appointed men to judge certain matters here on earth as reflective of His own justice. And one of those judgments is that those who murder, are to be killed.
Jason
LikeLike
March 19, 2010 at 4:55 pm
Pro-life means “innocent human life.” It doesn’t mean insects or mass murderers, for obvious reasons. What’s more interesting is people who get all worked up about convicted murderers getting punished or a chicken getting killed for food, but don’t bat an eye at late-term abortions of innocent humans.
LikeLike
March 20, 2010 at 11:43 am
Good luck trying to use Romans 13 as some sort of proof-text to trump all of Jesus’ teaching to support Christians actively supporting and even sponsoring death sentences. Truth be known, Romans 13 has greater implications, such as the “rightness” of events like Revolutionary War for example.
That we should respect and honor laws as citizens, so long as they don’t violate our faith (many Christians were thrown in prison and executed), this is a far cry from being a voice crying for so-called justice or judgement.
Jesus instituted capital punishment? Perhaps you can explain.
It’s not that Christ will kill, as much as God’s Holiness demands judgement. Christ seeks to save, and desires none to come to doom, even while they are now deserving. This is the purpose of the Atonement. You know that.
God has appointed us to put others to death? Really? Again, let’s flesh this out in the words of Jesus.
Should we also kill the adulterer, this was commanded in the Law? Why stop at murder?
American Christianity = gun-slinging, cowboy, frontier mentality. Christianity’s job is to cry out for injustice, the oppressed and the needy. Not to take up stones. This just simply does not match the words of Jesus, Sermon on the Mount or even the Early Church.
LikeLike
March 20, 2010 at 11:44 am
Arthur, that’s quite a broad generalization and border-line straw man. I don’t value chickens or humans. Like God, I am deeply sad and hurt for those who are victims to violent crime. Respectfully, that’s a dishonest rebuttal.
LikeLike
March 20, 2010 at 8:33 pm
I agree with Jason that the two issues are distinct. I also see no strictly Biblical basis for opposing capital punishment. God has given the power of the sword to the state for enforcing earthly justice, and one of the valid tools for this purpose is the execution of those who are guilty of especially heinous crimes.
However – personally, as a Christian, I take the position that we should not close the door on someone’s potential for salvation by terminating his or her life. I am also troubled by the fallibility of judges and juries; the death penalty, once enforced, precludes restitution should new evidence ever come to light. Furthermore, studies suggest that capital punishment is routinely more expensive than life imprisonment, because of the seemingly endless appeals, and has minimal deterrence value.
LikeLike
March 22, 2010 at 1:39 am
Jake,
I don’t think I need luck in interpreting Rom 13. It’s a pretty clear reference to capital punishment as practiced by the Romans, and according to Paul, they exercised the sword as servants of God.
As for my statement about Jesus instituting capital punishment, let me explain further. In the OT God instituted capital punishment in Genesis 9. The same God who commanded for murderers to be put to death is the same God who became incarnate in Jesus Christ. If Jesus is God, and God instituted capital punishment, then surely Jesus could not be opposed to capital punishment.
No, we should not kill the adulterer. That command was part of the Mosaic Law, which has been replaced by the New Covenant. The command to execute murderers, however, did not originate with the Mosaic Law.
Jason
LikeLike
March 22, 2010 at 1:48 am
Aletheist,
I am glad you agree with me on the Biblical position, but I fail to understand why you would, then, want to say we shouldn’t execute murderers. God commanded Noah to execute murderers because killing someone who is made in the image of God is an attack on God Himself. If capital punishment is a divine command, and if murder is viewed by God as an attack on Himself, who are we to tell God we don’t think it’s a good idea? I don’t see God telling Noah, “Those who shed man’s blood should have their blood shed by man, but in order to give them a chance to be saved, forget that I ever mentioned it.” No! Besides, in our system, someone sentenced to death has years to find salvation!
You mention the cost of executing someone and the lack of deterrence, but these are non-issues. If execution is the just punishment for murder, then that is what should be done, regardless of cost. As for deterrence, again, that’s not the issue. Justice is the issue. The punishment should fit the crime. When it comes to murder, imprisonment does not fit the crime. Why should someone who took another person’s life be allowed to keep his own? The only just punishment for such an individual is to forfeit his own life.
I’ll agree with you that capital punishment is not a deterrent, but I think that is largely due to two reasons: (1) it takes forever to actually execute someone in this country; (2) executions are not done in public. If executions were performed quicker, and they were made public in some manner, I’d almost guarantee that it would deter crime. But like I said, the purpose is not deterrence; it’s justice.
Jason
LikeLike
May 22, 2010 at 2:57 am
There are various and thoughtful interpretations of Romans 13. Even if we do not conclude that Romans 13 is offerring specific support for the death penalty, I suspect we can all agree that Romans 13 is specific to governments upholding the law, a law which does not exclude capital punishment.
16) (A) “If you do what is evil, be afraid; for [ the civil government ] does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is the minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath upon those who practice evil.” Romans 13:4. “God has given the state the power of life and death over its subjects in order to maintain order.” Dr. Charles Ryrie, The Ryrie Study Bible (NAS), 1978. (B) Romans 13:4 does not ” . . . directly refer to the infliction of the death penalty; but in the context of first century Rome and against the Old Testament background (Genesis 9:4-6), Paul would clearly include the death penalty in the state’s panalopy of punishments for wrongdoing.” Douglas Moo, The Epistle To the Romans, Erdmans, 1996, pg. 802, footnote 54. (C) “Since the word sword (machaira) has occurred earlier in the letter to indicate death (Romans 8:35) and since it was used of execution (Acts 12:2; Revelation 13:10), it seems clear that Paul means it here as a symbol of capital punishment.” Stott, John, ROMANS, InterVarsity Press, 342, 1994. (D) Specifically, “this word for sword indicates one that was shaped like a sabre and was carried by magistrates to show that they had the power to punish, even to death.” Ryrie Study Bible – Expanded Edition, NAS, Moody Press, 1995, pg. 1810, Romans 13:4, footnote 13:4. (E) “(Jesus) warned Peter that to ‘die by the sword’ is the punishment proper for those who take human life (Matthew 25:26); it should be noted that the sword was meant for execution, not for life imprisonment.” Henry, ibid F. 5, p 71. Also review F. 4, 5 and 25.
LikeLike
May 22, 2010 at 2:58 am
Synopsis of Professor Lloyd R. Bailey’s book Capital Punishment: What the Bible Says, Abingdon Press, 1987.
All interpretations, contrary to the biblical support of capital punishment, are false. Interpreters ought to listen to the Bible’s own agenda, rather than to squeeze from it implications for their own agenda. As the ancient rabbis taught, “Do not seek to be more righteous than your Creator.” (Ecclesiastes Rabbah 7.33.).
“Death Penalty Support: Christian and secular Scholars”
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/07/death-penalty-support-modern-catholic.html
Christianity and the death penalty
http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/DP.html#F.Christianity
God: ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and ‘Whoever curses father or mother must certainly be put to death.’ Matthew 15:4
Jesus: “So Pilate said to (Jesus), “Do you not speak to me? Do you not know that I have power to release you and I have power to crucify you?” Jesus answered (him), “You would have no power over me if it had not been given to you from above.” John 19:10-11
Jesus: Now one of the criminals hanging there reviled Jesus, saying, “Are you not the Messiah? Save yourself and us.” The other, however, rebuking him, said in reply, “Have you no fear of God, for you are subject to the same condemnation? And indeed, we have been condemned justly, for the sentence we received corresponds to our crimes, but this man has done nothing criminal.” Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” (Jesus) replied to him, “Amen, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.” Luke 23: 39-43
Jesus: “You have heard the ancients were told, ˜YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT MURDER” and “Whoever commits murder shall be liable to the court”. But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever shall say to his brother, “Raca”, shall be guilty before the supreme court and whoever shall say, “You fool”, shall be guilty enough to go into fiery hell.” Matthew 5:17-22.
The Holy Spirit: God, through the power and justice of the Holy Spirit, executed both Ananias and his wife, Saphira. Their crime? Lying to the Holy Spirit – to God – through Peter. Acts 5:1-11.
LikeLike
September 27, 2011 at 12:00 pm
[…] more reading on why the seamless garment argument does not work, see my post titled “The Seamless Garment Argument.” If you are interested in reading my assessment of capital punishment from a Biblical and […]
LikeLike