What penalty should abortion carry?

[1069]

Exactly. If you make abortion illegal, why would you not try and punish the killer, the pregnant woman?

I am pro-choice, so that's not my argument, but it's inconsistent to ignore the woman who, through her intent and actions, commits murder (if abortion is murder, as in BDBoop's scenario).

It's consistent with the Right's idea that women who have abortions are merely hapless dupes of the evil abortion industry, who somehow unwittingly end up with their feet in the wrong stirrups.
This allows members of the anti-choice movement to portray themselves as compassionate protectors of both women and children; never mind that it's pretty insulting to women's intelligence.
Admittedly, anti-choice women who claim (truthfully or not) to have previously been coerced into unwanted abortions which destroyed their lives don't help matters any.

 

[tryreading]

It's consistent with the Right's idea that women who have abortions are merely hapless dupes of the evil abortion industry, who somehow unwittingly end up with their feet in the wrong stirrups.
This allows members of the anti-choice movement to portray themselves as compassionate protectors of both women and children; never mind that it's pretty insulting to women's intelligence.
Admittedly, anti-choice women who claim (truthfully or not) to have previously been coerced into unwanted abortions which destroyed their lives don't help matters any.

Yep, it should be insulting to women, portrayed as victims by people who want to control them... er, protect them, and maybe punish an abortionist (doctor) here and there. But don't punish the woman at all, that would cost bunches of votes. Cake and eat it too, type thing.

I would just like pro-lifers to answer this honestly, though: Why wouldn't you punish a 'murderer' who your law made a murderer?

 

[Mustachio]

Looking over this forum I can see that this question has not been asked before, and yet it is a very important question.

What penalty should abortion carry?

Think about your answer then consider this next question

How will we know if a woman has actually had an abortion? (remembering that legislation does nothing to affect the rate of abortion)

and finally once you have thought on that

If someone you knew were admitted to in ICU with severe blood loss and sepsis and it was thought to be related to a backyard abortion - would you still want them prosecuted to the full extent of the law?

Women who have had an abortion should have a big "A" tattooed on their forehead.

Not really. Weird question.

 

[mac]

I would just like pro-lifers to answer this honestly, though: Why wouldn't you punish a 'murderer' who your law made a murderer?

I would punish the doctor/shaman that performed the abortion. I wouldn't punish the mother beyond perhaps mandatory counseling or sex ed (birth control ed). I feel anyone considering abortion is under a great deal of pressure that would adversely affect normal judgement and that should be taken into account. Anyone that would pursue an illegal abortion even more so, considering the risks involved would indicate the mother is indeed quite desperate.

 

[tryreading]

I would punish the doctor/shaman that performed the abortion. I wouldn't punish the mother beyond perhaps mandatory counseling or sex ed (birth control ed). I feel anyone considering abortion is under a great deal of pressure that would adversely affect normal judgement and that should be taken into account. Anyone that would pursue an illegal abortion even more so, considering the risks involved would indicate the mother is indeed quite desperate.

Okay, this guy just killed your sister (or brother). How much counseling should he get?

 

[mac]

I imagine anyone contemplating murder is strained somehow. But the murderer still needs to be tried, and if convicted, imprisoned or executed, right? Why should a pregnant woman get special treatment? Course she isn't pregnant anymore anyway, because she killed her baby/fetus, remember?

There are a lot of possible variables in the prosecution of any murder. in any case where there might be psychological contributers, the verdict is often adjusted to compensate.

 

[mac]

Okay, this guy just killed your sister (or brother). How much counseling should he get?

Your question indicates you completely misread my answer. I said the mother should get counseling, the Doctor should be prosecuted.

 

[tryreading]

Your question indicates you completely misread my answer. I said the mother should get counseling, the Doctor should be prosecuted.

I understood your answer perfectly.

But it is the mother who killed her baby. I am not asking you about her accomplice.

There is no abortion unless the mother decides she wants it. She is the perpetrator of the premeditated murder for hire. No baby or fetus dies unless she decides to murder it.

Yet she only gets counseling in your world...

She is not punished at all? So, for all intents, if you make abortion illegal, women can still do it at will with no consequences.

Makes sense to me...

 

[prometeus]

on the contrary; we're not about trying to force you to change your mind

Of course not, nor did I say you did. You want the rest of society to be forced to comply with your beliefs even if they do not share it.

if you really want to hold the belief that the unborn aren't human

Again this is just more of the same stupid rationale you resort to in lieu of rational thinking. No one disputes the biological classification of the fetus.

just as i wouldn't want to force you to change your mind if you believed that women weren't the rightful equals of men, or if you really wanted to believe that blacks should properly be the property of whites.

Irrelevant drivel.

i just want to change the law so that your (imo) abusive belief is not backed by state power.

Yes you want to force everyone to comply with your beliefs.

because it's the same situation everywhere you go in the process.

?

but before we dive into that, i'd like to see a solid explanation as to what has fundamentally changed in the nature of that child that makes one 'human' and the other 'not'.

See above.

which is i suppose your way of saying you have no answer?

No, thatis my way of telling you that what you posted was lame.

on the contrary; law is based generally on whatever opinion the lawmakers have for whatever reason they have it.

But not just emotional hype, which is the only thing you have.

nope. aware of the practice of sharia law, pashtunwali, etc. much?

So what if you are aware of it? So are others.

maybe the next chapter for your study should be Derridas' treatment of "tolerance".

Naw, I prefer reality and rational thinking over sophistry. It seems you prefer the opposite.

i am pointing out that the entire debate comes down to whether or not you beleive than an unborn child is a human child.

No, I believe that a human fetus is a human fetus and it has no particular significance.

i do not consider removing the right to kill another to be 'oppression'.

First you have to demonstrate and have society agree with you on what constitutes an "other.' As the situation stands now you would oppress as the fetus does not count as an other.

see how that works?

I also see that you do not.

you only see oppression because your starting assumption is that the unborn child is, in fact, not. i find your assertion that banning abortion is 'oppressive' towards women as ridiculous as the assertion that banning child-rape is 'oppressive' towards catholic priests ( zing! :lol: ) because i start with the opposite assumption.

That is just plain stupid.

 

[jamesrage]

I would punish the doctor/shaman that performed the abortion. I wouldn't punish the mother beyond perhaps mandatory counseling or sex ed (birth control ed). I feel anyone considering abortion is under a great deal of pressure that would adversely affect normal judgement and that should be taken into account. Anyone that would pursue an illegal abortion even more so, considering the risks involved would indicate the mother is indeed quite desperate.

Do you think people who contemplate murder just take it lightly and exercise normal judgment while killing someone and that they are not under any stress?

If abortion becomes illegal and is defined as murder then the mother is direct ly involved. She took the victim somewhere to be killed,hired someone to kill the victim and held the victim down so that someone may kill the victim. So the mother should be punished just the same as anyone else who those kinds of of things. If someone killed your sister you wouldn't be saying they should just get therapy.

 

[reefedjib]

A human embryo is completely human and deserving of human rights...No, because science shows us that an embryo is a human life worthy of human rights. It has a right to life.

What makes you think this? I agree that fetuses are human. But I disagree that they have human rights. They comes at birth.

 

[reefedjib]

on the contrary; we're not about trying to force you to change your mind if you really want to hold the belief that the unborn aren't human; just as i wouldn't want to force you to change your mind if you believed that women weren't the rightful equals of men, or if you really wanted to believe that blacks should properly be the property of whites.

i just want to change the law so that your (imo) abusive belief is not backed by state power.

The unborn are human but they are not endowed with human rights. Those come at birth. Therefor, abortion is not murder.

Why do you want to change this?

 

[mac]

I understood your answer perfectly.

But it is the mother who killed her baby. I am not asking you about her accomplice.

I guess I see it differently, I think that the doctor killed the baby, and the mother is the accomplice. If abortion were illegal, then I suppose whatever punishment the law deems is appropriate for an accomplice to murder is due.

Yet she only gets counseling in your world...

It's not my aim to punish, really, my hope is (if it were illegal) that policies to stop it actually did stop it rather than just punish those that do it. This is really an "in a nutshell" version of my thoughts that would take a couple of thousand words to accurately describe.

 

[mac]

Do you think people who contemplate murder just take it lightly and exercise normal judgment while killing someone and that they are not under any stress?

Some are, some aren't. This is why there are different punishments for "crimes of passion" vs say murder for monetary gain.

If abortion becomes illegal and is defined as murder then the mother is direct ly involved. She took the victim somewhere to be killed,hired someone to kill the victim and held the victim down so that someone may kill the victim. So the mother should be punished just the same as anyone else who those kinds of of things. If someone killed your sister you wouldn't be saying they should just get therapy.

I don't disagree with this, to be honest. I do however think it's a different sort of murder than putting a gun to someone's head and pulling the trigger. The law already gives different punishments based on the circumstances of a murder, why should that be any different for abortion?

I hadn't really thought to much on punishing the aborter before this thread appeared. My initial reaction, as a pro-lifer, is that she should be punished for murder as the law allows, however, I feel that there are factors which "cause" the mother to abort which should be addressed as well. I'd like to see these aggravating factors dealt with on a societal level as much as on the individual that aborts.

 

[mac]

What makes you think this? I agree that fetuses are human. But I disagree that they have human rights. They comes at birth.

I disagree, hence prosecution for double murder in the case of killing a pregnant woman.

 

[Orion]

It's not my aim to punish, really, my hope is (if it were illegal) that policies to stop it actually did stop it rather than just punish those that do it. This is really an "in a nutshell" version of my thoughts that would take a couple of thousand words to accurately describe.

You can't really stop it, you'd just make it less safe to get. A woman who really doesn't want to have a baby is going to find a way to get rid of it. The only difference is whether or not our society gives her safe agency to do so.

I also find it slightly delusional to think that illegalization of abortion would only target providers. The pro-life movement revolves around punishing women for not keeping their legs shut; it revolves around removing a woman's empowerment to take responsibility for her own consequences in the ways she sees fit. If abortion is murder then a woman seeking one is in the first degree.

The only thing I wonder about is how exactly the punishment would be carried out. In the 1950's, it was the psychiatric establishment and its underdeveloped, draconian values that got hold of women who had abortions. A woman would be classified as having any sort of illness just to institutionalize her, because why would any sane woman want to kill a child, right? In the year 2010, the APA would never conform to the law in such a manner. It wouldn't just make up a mental illness for those seeking abortion like back in the day... which means that women would just have to be jailed.

Once again, I really don't think the pro-life movement has really thought this through, and what it would mean for society.

 

[reefedjib]

I disagree, hence prosecution for double murder in the case of killing a pregnant woman.

I agree that that is an inconsistent view, abortion versus double murder, but that still doesn't extend human rights to the fetus.

 

[mac]

I agree that that is an inconsistent view, abortion versus double murder, but that still doesn't extend human rights to the fetus.

I think it does, in a way. At least under those circumstances.

 

[mac]

You can't really stop it, you'd just make it less safe to get. A woman who really doesn't want to have a baby is going to find a way to get rid of it. The only difference is whether or not our society gives her safe agency to do so.

You can't stop drug abuse either, but that's still prosecuted.

I also find it slightly delusional to think that illegalization of abortion would only target providers. The pro-life movement revolves around punishing women for not keeping their legs shut; it revolves around removing a woman's empowerment to take responsibility for her own consequences in the ways she sees fit. If abortion is murder then a woman seeking one is in the first degree.

What penalty is more severe... possession of narcotics or possession of narcotics with intent to sell?

Once again, I really don't think the pro-life movement has really thought this through, and what it would mean for society.

no more or less than you did about this post.

 

[BDBoop]

I think it does, in a way. At least under those circumstances.

In what way.

 

[reefedjib]

I think it does, in a way. At least under those circumstances.

I don't think it extends human rights to the fetus, but it recognizes the potential. Since the fetus' life was taken without the permission of the mother, in whom it entirely depends for it's life, it is deemed murder. However, this does not exclude the mother from making the decision to abort, since the fetus is in her control. The fetus still doesn't have human rights to prevent the mother from making that decision.

 

[Orion]

You can't stop drug abuse either, but that's still prosecuted.

Yes, and I am against that as well. The war on drugs is being perpetuated by the same ignoramuses who want to ban abortion.

What penalty is more severe... possession of narcotics or possession of narcotics with intent to sell?

Look, I'm not going to equivocate on this with you. Abortion is not drug dealing. Please come up with a better argument.

no more or less than you did about this post.

You didn't address anything I said, and you snipped out the key parts. This is why I don't like debating with you mac. You are avoidant of the meat of the argument because it's inconvenient to your personal philosophy. I find it disrespectful, given I put in time and energy to craft arguments that I hope you will actually read and respond to.

It's a shame because you demonstrate relative intelligence compared to some of the other pro-lifers on here. Don't waste it on being petty.

 

[mac]

In what way.

How can you prosecute someone for murder if what was killed isn't human? If someone kills a dog, are they prosecuted for murder?

 

[mac]

Yes, and I am against that as well. The war on drugs is being perpetuated by the same ignoramuses who want to ban abortion.

You don't not prosecute crimes because they are difficult to stop. Crimes are prosecuted because they are crimes.

Look, I'm not going to equivocate on this with you. Abortion is not drug dealing. Please come up with a better argument.

That was a perfectly good argument that you are unprepared to address.

You didn't address anything I said, and you snipped out the key parts. This is why I don't like debating with you mac. You are avoidant of the meat of the argument because it's inconvenient to your personal philosophy. I find it disrespectful, given I put in time and energy to craft arguments that I hope you will actually read and respond to.

I respond to what I find relevant, the remainder of your essay is inconsequential.

It's a shame because you demonstrate relative intelligence compared to some of the other pro-lifers on here. Don't waste it on being petty.

Relative intelligence? You are the judge of that?

 

[mac]

I don't think it extends human rights to the fetus, but it recognizes the potential. Since the fetus' life was taken without the permission of the mother, in whom it entirely depends for it's life, it is deemed murder. However, this does not exclude the mother from making the decision to abort, since the fetus is in her control. The fetus still doesn't have human rights to prevent the mother from making that decision.

So, in your mind, the only person on earth who has the power to judge the worth of humanity is the mother?

But......if the mother is dead....why still double murder?? She's not there to deem the child a human.