Video: Pro-lifers reluctant to punish women who abort
posted at 2:43 pm on August 2, 2007 by Allahpundit
Anna Quindlen thinks this clip is Teh Awesome because it shows how squeamish even anti-abortion activists are about locking women up for their “crime.” My hunch is that the guy who shot it went out looking for wingnuts breathing fire about sending aborters to the electric chair, was disappointed when he didn’t get what he want, and cobbled this together as salvage. What the clip actually does, as E.M. notes, is put the lie to the nutroots canard that the pro-life movement is all about controlling women. If that were true, the penalty phase would be the most well thought out part of the plan. Instead it’s the least, which suggests two things: that their goal is what they say it is, i.e. stopping the behavior itself (albeit without much sense as to how they’ll do that), and that they do indeed compassion for women for whom this decision is obviously very hard (“just pray for them”).
But then what do I know? I’m part of the Patriarchy. Click the image to watch.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Pro-lifers are about saving children, not hurting women.
With that said, greedy butchers often referred to as abortion mill doctors and Planned Parenthood personnel, a few years in prison for each count would be nice. Margaret Sanger is one freak that should have been locked up.
saved on August 2, 2007 at 2:49 PM
The thing many pro-lifers argue is that the baby isn’t the only victim of an abortion, the mother suffers too, and for that reason, it’s especially damaging to society as a whole.
Esthier on August 2, 2007 at 2:52 PM
Well, abortion was illegal for a time, so presumably the laws would be enforced similarly now as then. But this is really begging the question, assuming that pro-lifers want to punish women. In fact, as saved indicates, those who have thought about such things would seek to punish the providers, not the users, kind of similar to how the pro-treatment anti-legalization crowd feels about drugs. Punish primarily those who both perform and profit from the illegal activity.
calbear on August 2, 2007 at 2:56 PM
Yes, but that’s a cop out insofar as some women will perform the procedure themselves, especially if providers are afraid to.
Allahpundit on August 2, 2007 at 2:58 PM
If Roe vs. Wade is overturned, wouldn’t that allow states to set their own laws regarding the practice?
I guess I always assumed that if we succeed in making abortions illegal in any state that it would be the providers who would face punishment, not the woman.
And it is not about controlling women.
Dork B. on August 2, 2007 at 2:59 PM
It’s a lot easier to forgive yourself, when you’re living.
The Race Card on August 2, 2007 at 2:59 PM
I think this Quindlen column was terrific (and I don’t often say that). It really highlights how pro-lifers are full of righteous indignation, but don’t really think their position through.
They’re just like “liberals” with Iraq.
The pro-life movement may not be about controlling women, but it’s also not about sober engagement with a complex moral issue. It’s probably about making Jesus happy, but what would I know about that…
Enrique on August 2, 2007 at 3:00 PM
Making abortion illegal is as much about punishing doctors, nurses, (or anyone) who perform the procedure as it is about punishing women. Similar to how our drug laws which are designed for punishing drug dealers as much as they are for punishing addicts.
However, the problem with women bearing unwanted children is the stigma (punishment) we place on women for having unwanted children in the first place. So which is worse, the punishment we place on women who do keep their unwanted children, or any punishment we may place on women who abort?
With drug addicts there are a number of options for helping them recover from their addictions and other drug related problems. But with women receiving abortions, who are usually doing it as a result of some other problems, we just turn them back to their problems with minimal if no assistance.
So, what would be a good punishment for women who receive illegal abortions? Incarceration? Fines? Mandetory Counseling?
I think anyone who is in a position of deciding in favor or ending a life requires at a minimum least some kind of serious professional Counseling.
Since I view aborting a baby as murder my solution is to first prosecute the abortion provider for murder. Then prosecute the woman in a manner requiring mandatory counseling. And, no, I have no expectations that my solutions will ever become reality.
Lawrence on August 2, 2007 at 3:04 PM
I wouldn’t be opposed to punishment for women who perform the procedure themselves, or assist another. Or “repeat offenders”, for that matter.
If you believe that abortion is equal to murder, it’s kinda hard to make the argument that no punishment is required, even though I think most of us pro-lifers aren’t motivated by the desire for vengence.
We want to save babies and prevent young women from making tragic mistakes that they will always regret.
Dork B. on August 2, 2007 at 3:06 PM
There are several Christian ministries centered around women who have had abortions. Women who have suffered injury and lost other babies due to a botched “legal” abortion are often looking for counseling. Women who reach a point where they have deep regret for what they have done also need comfort and to know that God forgives them.
The Libs have made abortion so available that young women and confused women figure it’s the only way to go if they are pregnant and don’t want a baby. It’s a larger blight than slavery on our history, but the same people that want to see reparations in place, want unlimited access to abortion as birth control.
Hening on August 2, 2007 at 3:06 PM
It is an interesting question. What is the penalty for using drugs? Not much. However, penalties for dealing drugs is severe.
Spending money foolishly and risking one’s own health is not as bad as breaking the law to make money while endangering others. Our laws are primarily focused on those who do harm to other citizens especially for profit.
In this case, “doctors” who perform abortions are the greater transgressors of the law. Furthermore they have profited and therefore have profit to lose in penalty.
I am not a lawyer. I find it hard to believe that out of all of those interviewed NOT ONE made this argument. Surely it was omitted.
Agrippa2k on August 2, 2007 at 3:06 PM
Oh no it isn’t…it’s about valuing human life, all human life.
Pretty simple, actually.
Bob's Kid on August 2, 2007 at 3:06 PM
You do know their are non religious people who are pro-life right?
EnochCain on August 2, 2007 at 3:06 PM
As a pro-lifer or “anti-abortionist” I will tell you that the penalty phase is probably the least thought out, especially when it comes to the women who go through with having their unborn child killed. You will get varied answers depending on who you talk to because the punishment is not the point. The point and purpose of the whole movement is to end abortion in order to save the lives of unborn children.
As has already been stated I would much rather see the provider punished than the mother. They face a difficult decision and while I disagree with them, I understand they are under a great deal of pressure. They chose wrongly in a period of confusion and stress. The providers kill children on a daily basis apart from the factors weighing on the women. It’s the difference between a crime of passion – in the moment, no premeditation – and a well thought out killing spree. Yes, they committed the same crime but under vastly different circumstances.
Abortion should be outlawed not for the purpose of punishing the mother or even the provider, but to make it absolutely clear that our society does not condone the taking of innocent life and to make it much safer for both child and mother.
wardrobedoor on August 2, 2007 at 3:09 PM
Thank you anonymous pro-life activist. I was about to write:
However the woman at 4:07 restored my faith. She acknowledged that, if murder, it should be illegal and if illegal, there should be punishment.
Exactly.
With the goal of preventing future victims and retribution for killing her child.
Christoph on August 2, 2007 at 3:14 PM
And this is precisely what makes it so difficult to be pro-life in America today.
There is a template of the pro-life movement as a bunch of mind-numbed cultists who are all following the orders of Revs. Falwell, Robertson, Et. al, when there are actually people of all religious and “non-religious” persuasions who view the concept of human life in the same way.
What makes humanity different? That is the first and most important question in this debate that must be answered; are we just animals, and if not what makes us different? If we are just another animal, why stop at abortion? We should be able to slaughter each other freely at all stages of life, since animals are arguably incapable of respecting life in the same way that humans do.
These basic philosophical questions are largely lost on the liberals, it seems, whose first, last, and only rule is, “Look out for #1.”
gryphon202 on August 2, 2007 at 3:14 PM
It’s also a crime to kill yourself, yet it’s a very difficult one to punish.
Besides, women do that already anyway. There’s already a woman who shot her own stomach the day she was to give birth and killed the kid that was just hours from being legally designated human.
Our laws are so backwards when it comes to deciding when it’s OK to call it murder and when it’s not based on the mother’s decision to have or not have the child. So in reality, it’s the choice that’s being murdered or not murdered.
Esthier on August 2, 2007 at 3:15 PM
A woman who treats her unborn child as a parasite to be removed should not be referred to as “mother”. We let our sentimentalities cloud our judgments. Mothers are going to jail every day for using drugs while pregnant. They are punished for inflicting physical damage to the infant… but would not be punished for infanticide?
If the day comes when men regain the courage to be protectors of children, there will be an ample safety net to support any and all reluctant women to delivery and adoption. That’s the question to ask – If we outlaw abortion, but support women from prenatal needs through adoption, should women and their doctors serve prison time for conducting secret abortions? Damn right.
T J Green on August 2, 2007 at 3:18 PM
Of course, everyone’s entitled to his or her own opinion on that one, but, for those who would not want to punish the mother, they’d say that an illegal abortion was its own punishment. The YouTube comment I liked was the one that answered the question of whether there was any crime for which the perp was unpunished. The answer? Attempted suicide. Again, it’s sort of its own punishment, and I’d imagine that, in both cases, anyone helping would get a worse punishment that the (surviving) person whose body was affected by the crime. I assume that’s why suicide is a crime: to punish anyone who aids in the suicide without having to prove murderous intent.
Anyway, this seems to be yet another issue on which all too many on each side naïvely and smuggly chide their opponents for their smugness and naïveté. I generally like to avoid the topic for such reasons, but, when people call the pro-lifers naïve (a polite way of saying “stupid rednecks”), I’ll point out that you can be against abortion but also against imprisonment of women who abort. Someone should be punished if it’s illegal, but not necessarily the mothers.
calbear on August 2, 2007 at 3:18 PM
The idea is to stop the doctors and the industry not jail the women. If a woman is “caught” a slap on the wrist and some counseling. If a Doctor is caught, then he/she should face potential prison time.
TheBigOldDog on August 2, 2007 at 3:20 PM
I really don’t see the inability to articulate or even decide on a specific solution to a problem as a repudiation of the very existence of that problem. Or, maybe put another way, I don’t see the inability articulate specific a application of a principle as a repudiation of the principle.
Here’s an analogy. If someone went around to a conservative convention and asked self-described pro-capitalist and free market advocates what they propose to do about, say, the trade deficit with China or European farm subsidies, you would get similarly incoherent answers. But I don’t think many people on this site would take that as “proof” that free-market principles are invalid or supporters of capitalism “haven’t thought it through”.
Really, it’s just proof of two things. Life is complicated, and we don’t always have all the answers.
mjgreco on August 2, 2007 at 3:20 PM
Of course, it could also be argued that multiple offenders shouldn’t be treated with such leniency. In a society in which abortion is an abomination, it’s difficult to imagine someone who terminated multiple pregnancies – be they doctor or mother – facing no criminal charges.
calbear on August 2, 2007 at 3:21 PM
Big difference between their side and ours.
Why doesn’t anyone talk about Adoption?
My cousin and other folks I know adopted children from outside this country because they couldn’t adopt here. There never seems to be any discussion about the alternative to abortion, is there?
Wouldn’t that be the correct definition of ProLife?
Kini on August 2, 2007 at 3:21 PM
I read this article yesterday and it was very enlightening. The statistics about future pregnancies, elevated suicide rates and the fact that no state has ever looked at the woman as a criminal were great.
I want to thank Anna Quindlen for her question. She helped to put more arrows in my quiver.
Harpoon on August 2, 2007 at 3:22 PM
Maybe the punishment should be having strangers pray for you?
Snicker, snicker.
Christoph on August 2, 2007 at 3:24 PM
Again, these people, even if it’s at a subconscious level, are more focused on shutting down the doctors and the clinics (the industry) than they are about stopping the women. That’s why they never focus on the punishment of the woman. Ask them what they think should happen to Doctors and I bet you’d get ready answers.
TheBigOldDog on August 2, 2007 at 3:24 PM
Yeah but what about the guys who pressure their wives and girlfriends into getting an abortion?…My ex had an abortion because between her ex bf and the abortion provider she went to she was all but dragged into the back room and she has not gotten over it since then and it has been years.
EnochCain on August 2, 2007 at 3:25 PM
Any woman the aborts a baby after the first trimester is guilty of murder. Period. That excludes cases of rape or incest. This really is a no brainer, AP.
Andy in Agoura Hills on August 2, 2007 at 3:26 PM
(cue crickets)
Don’t bother thinking this thing through, Enoch. Otherwise really smart people like Enrique, Allah, and JayHawPhrenzie, sometimes enjoy a thread in which to bash Christians for our ill-thought-out philosophy, kind of like having a good cigar.
Yesterday JayHaw was able to devolve a post with Hitchens discussing hate crime applications and the antisocial behavior of the radical Islamists into “Christians are stupid, weak people who are just not as well educated or enlightened as me”, and if this is Thursday, it must be Enrique declaring that if you’re pro-life, then Jesus is stupid or make-believe or something.
Move along…nothing to see here.
Jaibones on August 2, 2007 at 3:26 PM
Again we hear a lot about the women but nothing about the men who sometimes pressure them.
EnochCain on August 2, 2007 at 3:27 PM
Absolutely, whatever you believe is the way it is with no need for further thought.
Christoph on August 2, 2007 at 3:27 PM
Completely accurate.
Pro abortion fanatics always want to scare women by claiming that the Right to Life folks want to put women in jail for having abortions. I’ve never known a single pro life person who wants to jail a woman for having an abortion.
If liberals would just tell the truth for One Day, it would be so refreshing.
Labamigo on August 2, 2007 at 3:28 PM
Yeah I have noticed any thread lately can instantly dissolve into a Christian hate fest.
EnochCain on August 2, 2007 at 3:28 PM
I’m well aware of that situation. I believe it should be treated the same as anyone else who pressures or entices a third party to commit murder.
Christoph on August 2, 2007 at 3:28 PM
I do.
Christoph on August 2, 2007 at 3:29 PM
Many of these women can’t imagine having a child they would never see. I actually knew someone who argued that it was better to kill the child through abortion than to let it live an entire life without her.
I was completely horrified but had to hold my tongue as she’d just had an abortion. Her boyfriend left her while she was pregnant, and instead of offering counseling, the school gave her anti-depressants and while keeping her doped up on pills that damaged the baby anyway got her an appointment for an abortion.
Years later though, she still hadn’t forgiven herself.
And then you have women arguing that they’re being “punished” just by being forced to be pregnant for 9 months.
Until you can take the child outside of a woman for the duration of her pregnancy, you can’t keep this from being about her body and what she’s allowed to do to it.
And that is potentially a bad slope anyway. Do we punish pregnant women who miscarry because they don’t eat enough? Do we punish them for smoking while pregnant or being around smokers while pregnant? Do we punish women who work up until the day they give birth since they could be causing their unborn undue stress.
It’s still a complicated issue.
Esthier on August 2, 2007 at 3:33 PM
I was completely horrified but had to hold my tongue as she’d just had an abortion. Her boyfriend left her while she was pregnant, and instead of offering counseling, the school gave her anti-depressants and while keeping her doped up on pills that damaged the baby anyway got her an appointment for an abortion.
Years later though, she still hadn’t forgiven herself.
I’ve known dozen of women for whom that’s true.
Well, there’s hope. People do rehabilitate themselves.
Christoph on August 2, 2007 at 3:36 PM
Christoph on August 2, 2007 at 3:27 PM
Rats, you beat me to it.
Krydor on August 2, 2007 at 3:36 PM
may find some here, as I expect things to heat up over this one. I regret that I have errands to run, but before I go, this is how far I personally thought this issue through, nutshell version:
Life begins at conception.
A woman has no more right to abort a baby in the womb than she has the right to kill her children once they are born.
If the pregnancy puts her life at risk, she has every right to abort, as I believe that it enters into the realm of self-defense. If my wife might die because of a problem pregnancy and we have one or more other small children, I would say that we would be correct to abort.
Rape or Incest – I’m sorry, but I still say no. It is still a baby.
And if a baby is discovered to have congenital defects, disease, Down’s Syndrome? That’s more complicated for me, I would want the couple to have the baby, but I realize that caring for these kids requires more than some people are able to give, especially if it is a single mother with no help. I would want laws to be compassionate, I would want to be able to offer them help…
And on that note – my Pro-Choice sister asked “okay, you want to tell these women that they have to have babies they can’t afford, what are you prepred to do to help them afford childcare?”
My reply is this. It’s not my responsibility to pay for your child. I’m responsible for my children. it’s up to you and the child’s father to take responsibilty. But the soulution in most abortion cases, in my opinion, is to gorw up – you don’t kill a baby because you can’t afford it or never wanted it. Put it up for adoption.
Dork B. on August 2, 2007 at 3:36 PM
There are even many women who’ve been forced into these clinics by their own mothers. I knew a girl in high school who was pushed into one and had to run away with her boyfriend when he came to help her leave.
Talk about choice. Whose choice?
Esthier on August 2, 2007 at 3:36 PM
may find some here, as I expect things to heat up over this one. I regret that I have errands to run, but before I go, this is how far I personally thought this issue through, nutshell version:
Life begins at conception.
A woman has no more right to abort a baby in the womb than she has the right to kill her children once they are born.
If the pregnancy puts her life at risk, she has every right to abort, as I believe that it enters into the realm of self-defense. If my wife might die because of a problem pregnancy and we have one or more other small children, I would say that we would be correct to abort.
Rape or Incest – I’m sorry, but I still say no. It is still a baby.
And if a baby is discovered to have congenital defects, disease, Down’s Syndrome? That’s more complicated for me, I would want the couple to have the baby, but I realize that caring for these kids requires more than some people are able to give, especially if it is a single mother with no help. I would want laws to be compassionate, I would want to be able to offer them help…
And on that note – my Pro-Choice sister asked “okay, you want to tell these women that they have to have babies they can’t afford, what are you prepred to do to help them afford childcare?”
My reply is this. It’s not my responsibility to pay for your child. I’m responsible for my children. it’s up to you and the child’s father to take responsibilty. But the soulution in most abortion cases, in my opinion, is to gorw up – you don’t kill a baby because you can’t afford it or never wanted it. Put it up for adoption.
Sorry about the incomplete ( and long) post above…
Dork B. on August 2, 2007 at 3:37 PM
Are you saying there is no point in making abortion illegal… because some women will continue to do it in spite of the law? By that logic we would need to revoke all laws.
Maxx on August 2, 2007 at 3:38 PM
Oh, this is gonna be a laugh. Okay, smartass, why is it not murder???
Andy in Agoura Hills on August 2, 2007 at 3:39 PM
Thank God for the boyfriend.
It would have been better not to get the girl pregnant, obviously, and I think everyone realizes that or not.
But when it time to commit murder of his own child, he stepped up. He did right to help his girlfriend maintain her soul and his child, its life.
Christoph on August 2, 2007 at 3:39 PM
There are lots of good responses on this thread. The point is that punishment under the law is to protect society from a criminal committing an act again. So abortion is not necessarily like ‘murder’ in that it doesn’t endanger anyone who is outside of the woman’s body. Jail punishment wouldn’t protect society from harm.
HOWEVER, I would think it would be appropriate to at least force them to have their tubes tied so that they would not be allowed to kill another baby.
The providers and doctors would serve jail time because they would profit off of these murders. Why don’t doctors prescribe marijuana to glaucoma or chemotherapy patients? Because it’s illegal. Can they still get marijuana on the streets? Yes, but the doctor won’t be involved.
If it is illegal, doctors won’t perform the task. The point behind the pro-life movement is the protection of the baby. Once the baby is aborted, no amount of punishment will allow that baby the right to life that everyone is supposed to get under the law. It may not be ideal for the baby if the parents aren’t rich, but that doesn’t mean they wouldn’t grow up to be pillars of the society who could discover cures for diseases, et al. Once the abortion occurs, the damage to society is done. Abortion is barbaric as is the death penalty.
ThackerAgency on August 2, 2007 at 3:41 PM
Oh, this is gonna be a laugh. Okay, smartass, why is it not murder???
Andy in Agoura Hills on August 2, 2007 at 3:39 PM
There’s an antidote to ignorance, Andy, it’s called reading: My comments on this thread.
Also, I’m not criticizing your position (although I disagree with it in part) as much as I’m criticizing your debating style and logic, which is to pick an
middle of the road position and say, “This is it; this is truth, and it’s obviously the only correct way to look at it.”
Obviously.
Christoph on August 2, 2007 at 3:42 PM
I’m sorry, my paste skilla seem to have vanished. what was missing in my botched post was a remark to Erique:
You’re right, it is about making Jesus happy. Sounds overly simplistic, I know. But it’s hard for a sinner like me!
Oh, man I also should apologize for all the typos. Sorry.
Dork B. on August 2, 2007 at 3:45 PM
Ah, poorly thought out contradictions in action… it’s a beautiful thing to behold.
The counterarguments are:
- it it endangers someone who is inside the woman’s body
- it protects that person from harm and, indeed, guarantees them the right to enter society
Christoph on August 2, 2007 at 3:45 PM
They were being careless, yes, but he was already planning on marrying her and raise the child with her. Her parents weren’t so happy about it and drug her to that clinic behind his back.
I’m a little torn on this one.
I would think that most parents would give their lives for their children. Why should it be different here, especially on a thread where people are calling abortion infanticide?
I wouldn’t force women to make that sacrifice anymore than I’d make them sacrifice their lives for their born children, but how can we say that the baby is the same as those who are born when we make this distinction? It feels a little too convenient sometimes.
The only way I see the scales changing are when the pregnancy will kill both the mother and the child.
Esthier on August 2, 2007 at 3:48 PM
Would you agree that it would be better if states were allowed to vote on various issues related to the debate and set their own laws – the way it was before Roe v Wade?
Dork B. on August 2, 2007 at 3:48 PM
how is that a contradiction? It is murder in that it kills a person, but it isn’t murder in that it doesn’t endanger the rest of society. Is that as far as you got into my post before you decided to comment on it?
I said for protection of society she should have her tubes tied. A woman who commits abortion isn’t likely a threat to anyone else. Laws are in place to protect society as I understand it.
ThackerAgency on August 2, 2007 at 3:49 PM
Funny thing is:
If this same woman birthed this same child and then killed it, pro-abortionists are just as eager as anyone else to incarcerate her and then provide medical and psychological help.
So my question back to all you pro-abortionists is, why do you chicken out on doing the exact same thing with this women when she kills her child prior to birth?
Lawrence on August 2, 2007 at 3:51 PM
Sure, that would equal more thought, wouldn’t it?
Christoph on August 2, 2007 at 3:51 PM
No, they’re not, as a rule.
Christoph on August 2, 2007 at 3:52 PM
I don’t see how.
1. The woman is only a danger to a person when that woman is pregnant and at no other time.
2. If she’s pregnant in jail, being jailed will not keep her from ending the life of the fetus.
Esthier on August 2, 2007 at 3:54 PM
I’m not sure if I’ve ever seen a poll done on that one. Maybe it’s time for one.
Esthier on August 2, 2007 at 3:56 PM
What should the punishment be for women who have abortion?
This is a typical method of pro-abortion advocates used to attempt to make those committed to the sanctity of human life appear extreme. The first question that needs to be asked is whether or not the unborn is a human life worthy of protection. We on the pro-life side believe it is and science agrees. If the pro-abortion enthusiasts can show that the unborn is not a human life worthy of protection, the debate would be over. No justification for abortion would be necessary. Knowing that their rhetoric gets them nowhere on this central question. They evade it and throw up a red-herring such as this.
The answer is. It is a legislative issue. All forms of homicide seperated by degrees, very few of which are capital crimes. This is a bit like asking what the punishment should be for slave-holders should slavery be made illegal. The first question that needs to be answered is ‘should slavery be made illegal.’ The legislative actions can be worked out later. Personally, I believe the criminal aspect should focus more on the provider of the abortion. But again, that can be worked out later.
Renae on August 2, 2007 at 3:59 PM
You raise an interesting point. I would say that I can’t make you stop smoking any more than I could prevent you from performing a self-abortion. I can’t control your actions without taking away your freedoms.
I could, however, make it illegal for any health care provider to perform an abortion on your baby. I guess I could mske it illegal for anyone to sell cigs to an obviously pregnant woman, but…
Anyway, good points!
Dork B. on August 2, 2007 at 3:59 PM
The threat of punishment decreases the odds she’ll kill her baby in the womb, just as it already decreases the odds she’ll kill her baby outside the womb.
2. It won’t prevent a baby’s death in all circumstances just like present law doesn’t. That’s why there is retribution.
Christoph on August 2, 2007 at 3:59 PM
Correct answer.
Christoph on August 2, 2007 at 4:01 PM
I’m not sure that a woman could possibly punish herself any more than destroying the child in her own womb. How could there be any greater self-loathing?
OhEssYouCowboys on August 2, 2007 at 4:03 PM
You know, I have to laugh at people like you. Because arguing wastes too much time and energy. You want me to read, eh? How ’bout you read a few things too, like the Hebrew Scriptures. You’ll learn how adults are supposed to act: better than animals. Whether you believe in G-d or not, your behavior should be elevated above that of an animal. Try it sometime, you’ll be suprised how much better you can become.
Andy in Agoura Hills on August 2, 2007 at 4:04 PM
…although if we can send paris hilton and what’s her name richy to jail for endangering human life, I’m not sure it would be that extreme to let a mother her knowingly kills her child spend a fews days or weeks in jail. But as I said, the focus should be on the abortion provider
Renae on August 2, 2007 at 4:07 PM
They should have to wear a letter A on all there clothes for 9 months…how is that.
tomas on August 2, 2007 at 4:08 PM
Rubbish! The reason they don’t have answers about punishment is that they have nothing to politically acceptable to say.
The reason Pro-Lifers try to appear compassionate is so that they can spew their lies about bad effects of abortion on women. Otherwise, it be would hard to explain in any politically feasible way why they care about their fantasies of the bad effects of abortion. Honest compassion is not an attempt to lay guilt trips on other people.
thuja on August 2, 2007 at 4:08 PM
To you, me, and anyone committed to the life of their child, that is true.
Not everyone feels that way, hence the reasons for laws.
If, and this is highly hypothetical, a person were to commit a horrendous moral crime like rape, murder, child molestation, rape, or treason MOST normal people would feel great shame.
However, it’s this same quality that makes them less likely to commit these crimes, no?
Likewise, most women don’t, in fact, kill their children. I know many women who are “pro-life” in the sense of buying into the liberal orthodoxy and believing men should butt out of their decisions… but who when faced with pregnancy could never abort their own children and are quite good mothers.
What to make of that?
Fuzzy philosophy and a decent heart.
Christoph on August 2, 2007 at 4:08 PM
I hate this Moot subject. Abortion is legal. End of story.
Masscon on August 2, 2007 at 4:12 PM
You are a despicable, disgusting person.
The women I know who are, a decade or more later, racked with guilt and have had negative psychological and spiritual consequences in their lives as a result, would disagree.
And then there are the physical effects.
It is you who are lying.
Christoph on August 2, 2007 at 4:12 PM
The fact remains that, a “mother” can destroy a child in her own womb, and this Godless society thinks nothing of it. But a third party who kills that same child in the womb can be charged with murder e.g., In Oklahoma, if a child in the womb is 24 weeks old, or older, and is viable, the third party can be charged with murder. Under this scenario, is the child in the “mother’s” womb, any less worthy of protection? Is it any less a child?
How any court can justify this paradox is beyond me.
OhEssYouCowboys on August 2, 2007 at 4:13 PM
Thanks. And yeah, you’re right. It’s much easier to punish those who help an act like that. For instance, it was much easier to put away Dr. Kevorkian then it would have been to put away those who sought his help.
It’s also more effective to punish those who sell cigs than it is to punish the teens who aren’t old enough to smoke them. They just get a ticket. The seller gets a significantly higher punishment.
It’s the same idea we have when it comes to illegal immigration. Punish the businesses who hire them in order to cut off their reason for coming here.
Well, now you’re changing the subject a little. These two points, while likely correct, have nothing to do with protecting the rest of society from her, which is generally why we remove people from society.
We take murderers away from the object of their homicidal tendency. We can’t do that with pregnant women, at least not as our technology currently stands.
Also, punishment doesn’t necessitate jail time. Even Andrea Yates isn’t in jail right now.
Esthier on August 2, 2007 at 4:19 PM
I think Allah sums it up very well. The video does suggest that punishing women is not what motivates these pro-lifers. Controlling women’s bodies isn’t what motivates them. It really is that they want to save babies. It appears to be a “Gotcha” video gone wrong, in that it portrays people with genuine compassion who do not display any malice at all towards women who abort.
As far as the length to which they have thought out this complicated issue, I think it boils down to the one real question that deserves an answer in this debate – the question I think most pro-choicers avoid: Is that fetus a living human? Is a fertilized egg a human life?
Because if it is, then abortion ceases to be exclusively about the woman’s rights. The baby’s rights enter into the argument at that point.
Dork B. on August 2, 2007 at 4:23 PM
I think he asked the wrong question. If abortions became illegal, then doctors would no longer be able to perform them legally. Therefore, if a doctor performed an abortion, then he or she should have their license suspended and possibly spend some jailtime. As for the woman who paid for the abortion, I don’t have any problem with her spending some jailtime.
Joshua P. Allem on August 2, 2007 at 4:26 PM
I saw this video as evidence of pro-lifers as genuinely concerned about babies, their rights, and their lives. That punishment for women seeking hypothetical illegal abortions hasn’t been thought through says that it is the child in the womb that pro-lifers really, really care about. These people aren’t out to control women, they are out to stop what they perceive as murder against children.
The arguments above about a woman’s guilt/shame/self-loathing being punishment enough, I think are a bit naive. You are assuming too much about a person’s values/conscience. Specifically, you are assuming that they are like your own. I think it should be a simple, agreed upon fact that, women who would wear a t-shirt that states proudly “I had an abortion,” are not as on about guilt and shame as you or I might be in the same situation. So, I don’t think self-punishment is a sustainable answer.
As far as making “Jesus happy,” I’ll admit that some of my pro-life leanings come from my commitment to my faith – however, I mostly support criminalizing abortion on grounds of personal responsibility – our society is advanced enough, and
nailinmyeye on August 2, 2007 at 4:27 PM
Christoph. The evidence is strong that I’m right. For example, “Pro-lifers”, for over a decade, have claimed that abortion causes breast cancer. It’s been well documented for over a decade that the claim is incorrect. (What is true is that woman gives birth to child while young (around 20) is less likely to get breast cancer.)
I too have known women who have had abortions, but they say they never think about. When I’ve told them about the Post-Abortion Syndrome, they say they have more important things to think about.
Yes, if women are made to feel guilty, they will feel guilty, just as some boys feel guilty about masturbation.
Darn! I forgot to start the post telling you what a horrible person you are. Just assume that I did, so we can achieve the appropriate degree of vitriol. I’d hate not to keep up my end of the conversational bargain.
thuja on August 2, 2007 at 4:27 PM
Argh…accidentally clicked submit before finishing my thought…
nailinmyeye on August 2, 2007 at 4:28 PM
Here is a great site where you can actually hear the testimonies of women who had abortions and regreted them. Included are:
actress Jennifer O’Neal
rocker wife Sharon Osbourne and a niece of Martin Luther King Jr., plus many more Are they lying or …?
Silent No More
Renae on August 2, 2007 at 4:31 PM
Isn’t that the reality they are facing in the Maryland case where they found numerous fetuses in the woman’s house? Basically, she aborted her own babies, so they don’t have a legal case against her.
Michael in MI on August 2, 2007 at 4:31 PM
1. The threat of punishment decreases the odds she’ll kill her baby in the womb, just as it already decreases the odds she’ll kill her baby outside the womb.
2. It won’t prevent a baby’s death in all circumstances just like present law doesn’t. That’s why there is retribution.
We remove people from society as punishment. Retribution. This is the third time I’ve used that word on this thread.
Yes, it protects people, but that is only one goal. It also protects people by deterrence, and you’re ignoring that fact.
Most women who have abortions do so because they economically, lifestylewise, or for emotional reasons don’t want children.
If they had to balance this with going to jail for a significant length of time, many more women would, for pure self interest, decline abortions.
So you’re point is weak, ill-thought out, and disingenuous.
Further to your deflection attempt, Andrea Yates is mentally ill. Not every woman who has an abortion is mentally ill although undoubtedly some are.
Where mental illness affects a person’s ability to judge right from wrong, the criminal justice system already has tools in place to redirect an offender into treatment or to absolve them of criminal culpability where appropriate.
So your point here equaled zilch.
Christoph on August 2, 2007 at 4:31 PM
As far as making “Jesus happy,” I’ll admit that some of my pro-life leanings come from my commitment to my faith – however, I mostly support criminalizing abortion on grounds of personal responsibility – our society is advanced enough, and birth control is so incredibly readily available, that abortion as a form of birth control is simply unnecessary. If a party chooses to have sex, and the natural result occurs, I believe it to be an incredibly huge shrug off of personal responsibility.
On issues of rape and incest or danger to the child or mother, I am hopelessly pro-choice.
nailinmyeye on August 2, 2007 at 4:33 PM
I agree completely.
I think he was fishing for some Far-Right Christian Hatred and had no luck. Thought-provoking question, nonetheless.
Dork B. on August 2, 2007 at 4:33 PM
I’m sure that’s true. The kind of women you would hang out with wouldn’t think about it.
As I said above, “You are a despicable, disgusting person.”
Christoph on August 2, 2007 at 4:33 PM
I was just going to go there.
Mothers are harmed and the effects can crop up any time if not directly afterward. The most disgusting harm comes with RU-486. Women can (and often do – sometimes to death) hemorrhage. Pill on kills the fetus. Pill two causes the woman to expel the dead fetus. The women are told by the Doctors who administer these awful drugs that if they start to hemorrhage, go to the emergency room and tell the Doctor that you are having a miscarriage. In other words – lie. If the girl is underage, lie about the guy’s age that got you pregnant so he will not be charged with a crime. Lie to your parents and get your abortion. All of this is harmful. Over 50% of participants in abortion die from the procedure – harmful. Pro-lifers lie how?
On-my-soap-box on August 2, 2007 at 4:34 PM
I can see where the people who are so committed to helping preserve the lives of the unborn that they spend years demonstrating against abortion wouldn’t want to spend time thinking up ways to punish woment who are already in difficult times.
I think the pro-abortion people are right to think about punishment, because once a stigma is put back on abortion, the logic for punishment is pretty inescapable.
That article a few days ago about the pro-life pharmacists who are being forced out of their profession was pretty frighening. Yet another case of ‘Liberals’ using courts to force their views on everyone else.
pedestrian on August 2, 2007 at 4:34 PM
an incredibly huge shrug off of personal responsibility…
to have an abortion.
Man, I am out of it today.
nailinmyeye on August 2, 2007 at 4:34 PM
LOL – How is that possible? Do you not have to think about it to even say you do not think about it?
On-my-soap-box on August 2, 2007 at 4:36 PM
Oh, that’s right. I forget that when women knowingly extinguish a life that was growing inside of them it’s all rainbows and puppy dogs.
In fact, it’s such a euphoric experience to have that thing sucked from them.
Esthier on August 2, 2007 at 4:37 PM
A fetus is not a human life, a blastyocyst is not a human life, sperm cells are not human lives, and eggs aren’t human lives either. To call abortion murder is nothing more than a muddling of the definition of “human life.”
It’s amazing that people who call themselves conservative come down on this side of the issue — the government forcing a woman to go through with a pregnancy (notice I didn’t say have a child seeing as having a child does not always follow being pregnant) because some man’s sperm managed to crawl up her body.
Nonfactor on August 2, 2007 at 4:46 PM
So when ignorant people say “they (we) don’t want the women punished,” get over yourself. If you don’t think it’s punishment for a woman to go through with a pregnancy she doesn’t want you really don’t understand this debate.
Nonfactor on August 2, 2007 at 4:49 PM
This is precisely where the debate divides. As much as you believe it is ridiculous for me to believe a fetus is a life, I think it is ridiculous for you to believe it is not.
The other day I felt my first baby kick in my wife’s uterus for the first time. You can’t tell me it is not a human life – no matter what you say, I cannot understand that sentiment.
nailinmyeye on August 2, 2007 at 4:49 PM
And now you’re just being rude when I thought we were having a polite disagreement. Oh, well.
It’s the main goal.
If you leave a serial killer free, he/she will continue to harm others. On the other hand, a first time drunk driver isn’t usually considered enough of a threat to get locked up.
We don’t usually lock up people who pose no threat to others simply for retribution, and yes, I caught the word when you first wrote it.
No, I’m not. As I wrote, before, though I guess you missed it. Your two points are likely correct.
HOWEVER, threat of jail time isn’t the only deterrent.
We have other means of discouraging specific behavior that doesn’t include putting people in jail, which is something you seem to be ignoring. When there is no real danger that a person will harm others, there’s no great rush to put that person in jail.
You want to prevent the act? Jail time isn’t the only way to do that. Surely we can agree on this point, otherwise all offenses would lead to jail time.
Esthier on August 2, 2007 at 4:51 PM
Words escape me.
I do, however, agree with your nickname.
Christoph on August 2, 2007 at 4:52 PM
I don’t understand. Is this where you pull out the rape?incest argument? help me out here.
Dork B. on August 2, 2007 at 4:53 PM
You sound a bit like Silky’s old bloggers.
Esthier on August 2, 2007 at 4:54 PM
Your right, and a careful rereading of your comment shows that. I apologize.
Threat of jail time isn’t even the main deterrent for decent people.
For example, I don’t need the threat of jail not to rob a bank. Why would I rob a bank? It’s not my money. Somehow, that alone, makes sense to me…
Unfortunately, for many people, this isn’t sufficient deterrent. That’s why we have rapists, murderers, abortionists, etc., and once upon a time we had slave traders.
Thus the requirement for laws…
Christoph on August 2, 2007 at 4:55 PM
I am a pro-lifer.
As far as the people in the video go, it should be this simple:
1. You believe it is a “life”
2. You believe it is “murder” to kill another life.
3. Therefore you would then HAVE to believe in penalties for what you labeled as murder of an innocent life.
I don’t see why pro-lifers shoot down their own beliefs with dancing around the penalty component. It makes people believe that YOU don’t even believe in what you are saying/promoting.
The pro-lifers in this video actually look like they are either lying or just plain stupid.
nottakingsides on August 2, 2007 at 4:58 PM
Except for the woman at 4;07, you are quite right.
Christoph on August 2, 2007 at 4:59 PM
Good call.
nailinmyeye on August 2, 2007 at 4:59 PM
They simply want the practice eliminated. Why MUST that qualify them to spell out the proper punishment if that is accomplished? I prefer to leave that in the hands of the governing body. Not Joe Schmoe on the the street.
Vaporman87 on August 2, 2007 at 5:00 PM
That’s also why we jail repeat drunk drivers, the ones for whom a subtle punishment is worthless.
As Nonfactor proves by telling all of us what a punishment it is for women who’ve the great misfortune of having a sperm making into and up her, somehow, some unknown way, we’re all VERY different people.
Besides, Nonfactor, as has been explained, many aren’t interested in punishing the woman, which implies that they’re free to do it themselves and rid themselves of the sperm who managed to crawl (swim is much more appropriate though unless you want us to believe this sperm made it into a woman who wasn’t having intercourse) into her.
The woman who does the dirty work herself might legally have more of a standing in this (the one in the video) proposed antidote to abortion.
Esthier on August 2, 2007 at 5:01 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »