• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

What is her punishment?

doughgirl said:
If the shoe fits wear it.

How does it feel to be one of them? Bloody hypocrite.
 
FISHX said:
Because being pro life is much more than just being anti termination

So you are anti-termination as far as the death penalty too. That's consistent.

But what punishment would you apply?
 
doughgirl said:
I believe God is the giver of life and death.
Looks like you and fishx are both agaibst the death penalty, when most people who are pro-life are for it.
 
tryreading said:
Looks like you and fishx are both agaibst the death penalty, when most people who are pro-life are for it.
people who are pro-life and actually delve into the logic of their stance usually conclude the death penalty is unneeded in a "civilized" society. There are many on the pro-life side, though--like many on the pro-choice side--, that just go with gut reactions to issues and don't bother with the rational consistency of their positions.
 
tryreading said:
If Roe vs Wade were to be overturned by the new Supreme Court, and abortion laws were enacted in your state, what should the punishment be for a woman who has had an abortion?
Well, the way that Roe-v-Wade can be overcome, short of a compleat overturning of the ruling, is by conferring upon the fetus the legal standing of "person".

At that point, since all people are given equal protection under the law, ending the life of a fetus would be treated no different than if the same were don to a newborn or an adult.

The type and degree of penalty would greatly depend upon the circomstances, as is the case with any Justifiable Homicide/Murder/Depraved Indifference/etc., case.

If we were to take your illustration of what we may in-vision as the standard abortion visit, then the crime would likely be First Degree (premeditated) Murder; One count per terminated fetus, charged to the mother, the doctor(s), nurse(s), receptionist, even the person who gave her a ride to the clinic.

The punishment would then be subject to the state's legal code and the Judge's opinion.

Jane Schmuck may get a modest to severe term in prison. While a politician would likely get 100 days in jail and a petty fine.
 
Felicity said:
people who are pro-life and actually delve into the logic of their stance usually conclude the death penalty is unneeded in a "civilized" society. There are many on the pro-life side, though--like many on the pro-choice side--, that just go with gut reactions to issues and don't bother with the rational consistency of their positions.

I think the pro-life/pro-death penalty contradiction is based on Biblical scripture, one interpretation of it anyway. I don't know the exact verses.

But the death penalty is a ridiculous sentence on every level. Innocent (or at least not guilty) people are found guilty and sentenced to death yearly. Also, only a very small percentage of those are ever executed, and the cost of each case to apply capital punishment is higher than imprisoning for life. Its a waste of time and money, and something the state shouldn't be doing anyway.

There is a convict here in Florida who was to die by lethal injection today, had the process started and the IV already in his arm, but the execution was stopped until the courts can rule whether this method of killing causes pain or not, and therefore may be cruel punishment. The legal argument is the subject may feel pain during the procedure, but since he is first paralyzed, can't indicate that it hurts. I want his lawyers if I ever get into trouble.
 
Busta said:
Well, the way that Roe-v-Wade can be overcome, short of a compleat overturning of the ruling, is by conferring upon the fetus the legal standing of "person".

At that point, since all people are given equal protection under the law, ending the life of a fetus would be treated no different than if the same were don to a newborn or an adult.

The type and degree of penalty would greatly depend upon the circomstances, as is the case with any Justifiable Homicide/Murder/Depraved Indifference/etc., case.

If we were to take your illustration of what we may in-vision as the standard abortion visit, then the crime would likely be First Degree (premeditated) Murder; One count per terminated fetus, charged to the mother, the doctor(s), nurse(s), receptionist, even the person who gave her a ride to the clinic.

The punishment would then be subject to the state's legal code and the Judge's opinion.

Jane Schmuck may get a modest to severe term in prison. While a politician would likely get 100 days in jail and a petty fine.

But you didn't give your opinion as to what the punishment should be.
 
tryreading said:
But you didn't give your opinion as to what the punishment should be.
Did I not?
Busta said:
If we were to take your illustration of what we may in-vision as the standard abortion visit, then the crime would likely be First Degree (premeditated) Murder; One count per terminated fetus, charged to the mother, the doctor(s), nurse(s), receptionist, even the person who gave her a ride to the clinic.

The punishment would then be subject to the state's legal code and the Judge's opinion.

What ever the punishment would be for taking you to a clinic and "aborting" you, that is what the punishment should be.

There are simply to many variables to give a more direct answer than that.
 
Busta said:
What ever the punishment would be for taking you to a clinic and "aborting" you, that is what the punishment should be.

So the punishment should be the same we would apply to someone who would kill me and I were defenceless?

That's life in prison or execution, if I understand you properly.
 
tryreading said:
So the punishment should be the same we would apply to someone who would kill me and I were defenceless?

That's life in prison or execution, if I understand you properly.
That's the way I understand it.
If a fetus is a person, then a fetus is a person.

It would be interesting to see the case where the mother was charged with, not only Murder or whatever, but a hate crime on top of that (because, say, she got drunk and got pregnant by a black man).
 
tryreading said:
So you are anti-termination as far as the death penalty too. That's consistent.

But what punishment would you apply?



Life imprisoment
 
tryreading said:
Looks like you and fishx are both agaibst the death penalty, when most people who are pro-life are for it.


Then they are not pro life they are anti -termination
 
tryreading said:
I want his lawyers if I ever get into trouble.
You don't have anything in mind.....do you?:lol:
 
tryreading wrote: "If Roe vs Wade were to be overturned by the new Supreme Court, and abortion laws were enacted in your state, what should the punishment be for a woman who has had an abortion?"

Heh, an acquaintance told me that the woman shouldn't be punished at all, but the man who impregnated her, putting her into the situation where she needed to seek an abortion, should be castrated. Personally I think that's a bit harsh, but it WOULD prevent some repeat-offenses!
 
Last edited:
FutureIncoming said:
Heh, an acquaintance told me that the woman shouldn't be punished at all, but the man who impregnated her, putting her into the situation where she needed to seek an abortion, should be castrated. Personally I think that's a bit harsh, but it WOULD prevent some repeat-offenses!

Well, I really don't agree with your friend's logic. The couple may have wanted kids, but the woman later decided otherwise. Or maybe he wore a condom to avoid pregnancy but it broke. But whatever his contribution, the woman makes the abortion decision. If abortion is illegal, and the woman isn't punished, I think the law is useless.
 
Felicity said:
You don't have anything in mind.....do you?:lol:
No. Pays to think ahead though. Even the innocent (I'm so innocent) can end up on the injection table.
 
Busta said:
It would be interesting to see the case where the mother was charged with, not only Murder or whatever, but a hate crime on top of that (because, say, she got drunk and got pregnant by a black man).

I guess in your above scenario the woman is white. Would a white woman have to be drunk to have intercourse with a black man?
 
tryreading quoted: "the man who impregnated her, putting her into the situation where she needed to seek an abortion, should be castrated."

--and wrote: "Well, I really don't agree with your friend's logic. The couple may have wanted kids, but the woman later decided otherwise. Or maybe he wore a condom to avoid pregnancy but it broke. But whatever his contribution, the woman makes the abortion decision. If abortion is illegal, and the woman isn't punished, I think the law is useless."

Well, I half-expect most any male human to object to castration as a penalty. It still remains true that pregnancy usually cannot happen without the participation of a male. And it remains true that if the cause of a crime can be prevented, then the crime can be prevented. How about penalizing BOTH, the man with castration and the woman with a hysterectomy? (Daffynition of "hysterectomy": An operation that takes away the kids but leaves the playground.)

The social consequences could be quite interesting! The typical failure rate of birth control leads to a lot of prevention-operations, and people still ABLE to breed get scared (and OTHER crimes increase as sexual frustration increases), while the penalized start inscreasing the STD rates, because they forgot that pregnancy isn't the only reason to be careful about sex. Not a pleasant place.
 
FutureIncoming said:
Well, I half-expect most any male human to object to castration as a penalty. It still remains true that pregnancy usually cannot happen without the participation of a male. And it remains true that if the cause of a crime can be prevented, then the crime can be prevented. How about penalizing BOTH, the man with castration and the woman with a hysterectomy? (Daffynition of "hysterectomy": An operation that takes away the kids but leaves the playground.)

The social consequences could be quite interesting! The typical failure rate of birth control leads to a lot of prevention-operations, and people still ABLE to breed get scared (and OTHER crimes increase as sexual frustration increases), while the penalized start inscreasing the STD rates, because they forgot that pregnancy isn't the only reason to be careful about sex. Not a pleasant place.

Yes, the castration idea has to go. My legs will be crossed the rest of the evening.

We don't necessarily prevent crime, though, we make it illegal and punish afterward. Even the castration of male child molesters doesn't fly in this country, and it would be an excellent preventative (of further molestations).
 
tryreading said:
I guess in your above scenario the woman is white. Would a white woman have to be drunk to have intercourse with a black man?
That would be up too her.

But no, she doesn't have to be white, she could be Italian, or Asian, or whatever.
 
You're all assuming illegal terminations would be surgical. The use of herbs as an abortifacient were very common too, in which case it'd be extremely hard to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the mother used them with intent to miscarry.
 
vergiss said:
You're all assuming illegal terminations would be surgical. The use of herbs as an abortifacient were very common too, in which case it'd be extremely hard to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the mother used them with intent to miscarry.

But in the scenario she has had an illegal abortion, whatever the means, and now is awaiting your sentencing.
 
tryreading said:
But in the scenario she has had an illegal abortion, whatever the means, and now is awaiting your sentencing.

Good luck proving it.

I personally find it hilarious that so many people here preaching life imprisonment or sterilisation as punishment have themselves had abortions, or their partners have had abortions. Some people are more equal than others, hey?
 
Busta said:
That's the way I understand it.
If a fetus is a person, then a fetus is a person.
But then, people have the right to use deadly force against those persons who assault your body and try to use your bodily resources.
 
Wow. Pro-lifers scare me even more now. :shock:
 
Back
Top Bottom