system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: If you’re pro-life in regards to abortion and want the government to ban it, you should also be pro-life for things other than the unborn.

You cannot claim to be pro-life yet be in support of practices like: the death penalty, hunting, fishing, not mask wearing out in public, the food industry in which millions of animals are killed a year, etc. I personally am pro-life for myself, but I am pro-choice for the country. I believe it’s a woman right to chose. However, it bothers me when some pro-lifers claim that it is okay to be in support of inhumane things that are actually not pro-life at all. For example, hunting. When someone goes out and hunts a deer, that deer has experienced 10x more life than a newborn baby and has way more consciousness (it’s more alive). Or even the death penalty, that person is 10x more alive than a fetus in the womb. I am against abortion because of personal morals, and that why I am against these things as well. I believe any person who considers themselves pro-life but support any of these activities... they are really just pro-birth.
gpt
Many people come to being Pro-Life from a perspective of seeing abortion as murder. Murder is not killing of something. It is the unlawful or unjustifiable killing of a human. They see abortion as being unjustifiable and thus think it should be unlawful. In this discussion you must acknowledge the fact that the word "murder"  cannot apply to non-humans without altering the definition. An unborn human is still human so the termination of that life is murder to those that feel it cannot be justified. Animals killed in hunting or slaughterhouses for food (or even sport) are not human so cannot be murdered. So everyone who is pro-life from a position of being anti-murder there is no reason for them to be pro-life for animals because it is not possible to murder animals. 

Now you do have some ground in your argument for death penalty. But here we come to other elements of what defines murder. The Unlawful and Unjustifiable killing of a human. Killing someone as punishment for a crime that they have committed is inherently lawful as it is a function of law itself. It is Justifiable to those that support it because they see the crimes it is applied to so severe that the people guilty of them need to permanently be removed from society and execution is the only way to guarantee that. 

Now lets return to the killing of animals. Even if you do expand the definition of "murder" to include the killing of any animal life. It would still have to be unjustifiable. To most people killing in order to eat is justifiable, so it would still not be murder.