OK, I'm totally making an unfair assumption about this guy's religious beliefs here, but for the sake of argument, and because there are definitely people in the world who share his views and definitely have these religious beliefs, let's assume that this guy's a fundamentalist Christian. Is there really such a thing as innocent life, in "his" opinion? I would argue not: see original sin. So assuming (as he does) that an unborn child is alive, they have sinned. Is it not then justified to kill them? If not, then how does one justify killing a convicted criminal?With regards to your anecdote, I think the contradiction diminishes if you consider him to value only innocent life. If the convict has been condemned, barring error on part of the justice system, then he is not innocent.
Most fundamental Christians believe that the guilt of original sin bars them from entering Heaven, not that it warrants their death. They believe that it is only through the grace of God that sinners (i.e. everyone) can enter Heaven. This is why you don't see them going around murdering people.
I had the conversation that spawned this post with a devout christian. My response wasn't about turning the other check, but about the adulteress that was about to be stoned. There was a circle of men around her, prepared to stone her for adultery. Jesus stepped in (like the bad ass motherfucker that he was) and said, "let ye without sin cast the first stone." -I said the to the guy I was talking with that if he wanted to kill people as punishment, first he needed to find someone without sin to pull the lever. crickets.....
Not sure, tbh. I was just arguing that fundamental Christians can still see 'innocent life' in the sense that they do not deserve whatever has happened to them, while still acknowledging that none are worthy of entering Heaven by themselves.