How liberals protect murderers and target children

For some weird reason the Huffington Post is a guilty pleasure for me. Maybe it stems from my days of being a talk radio producer, maybe it is because I love the news, maybe it is because watching liberals get angry over the smallest of injustices is just plain funny. I can confirm that it is not for the cogent commentary:

Aren't executions common around the world?

The United States was 1 of 22 countries to report executions in 2013, according to Amnesty International. The U.S. was the only country in the Americas, and it and Japan were the only two in the G-8, to have carried out executions last year.

The U.S. came in fifth on the list of most executions, after China, Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia. Is that really the kind of company we want to keep when it comes to human rights?

That was at the end of a long argument covering many reasons why the death penalty (something I support) is a bad, terrible, no good idea to support, but I really got a kick out of this one. You see, after the sob stories contained earlier in the "argument" about how sometimes these convicted murderers suffer while being executed (oh poor murderers, how dare they suffer, I'm sure their victims would be sad to hear about the burning sensation these savages suffer during the lethal injection process) they brought this whole tirade to the human rights argument.

My question to the author, who writes for a site that supports no limits on abortion and probably voted for a president who is in the abortions-on-demand camp, is what do you think about this little nugget?

A new report authored by Charlotte Lozier Institute (CLI) associate scholar Angelina Baglini and co-released today by CLI and Life Canada finds that the United States and Canada join China, North Korea, Singapore, Vietnam, and Netherlands in allowing abortion beyond 20 weeks, more than halfway through pregnancy and the point at which research shows the unborn child feels pain.

China and North Korea! Woohoo! What company!

So my question is, why is it ok for us to allow people to abort a child that can feel pain (and live outside the womb) but it is not ok to put a murderer to death?

As far as I see it there are three sides that have consistency in this argument - those who are against abortion and the death penalty, those who support the death penalty but not abortion on the grounds that abortion is the taking of an innocent human life, and those who support death for all (morbid, but these people are out there). The only side that has to defend keeping murderers alive while we slaughter innocent children is what is known as the modern Democratic party/progressive movement. Just keep that in mind the next time you consider every position of the candidates you may vote for.