Posted on 08/16/2007 11:23:43 AM PDT by mngran
Buried among prairie dogs and amateur animation shorts on YouTube is a curious little mini-documentary shot in front of an abortion clinic in Libertyville, Ill. The man behind the camera is asking demonstrators who want abortion criminalized what the penalty should be for a woman who has one nonetheless. You have rarely seen people look more gobsmacked. It's as though the guy has asked them to solve quadratic equations. Here are a range of responses: "I've never really thought about it." "I don't have an answer for that." "I don't know." "Just pray for them."
You have to hand it to the questioner; he struggles manfully. "Usually when things are illegal there's a penalty attached," he explains patiently. But he can't get a single person to be decisive about the crux of a matter they have been approaching with absolute certainty.
A new public-policy group called the National Institute for Reproductive Health wants to take this contradiction and make it the centerpiece of a national conversation, along with a slogan that stops people in their tracks: how much time should she do? If the Supreme Court decides abortion is not protected by a constitutional guarantee of privacy, the issue will revert to the states. If it goes to the states, some, perhaps many, will ban abortion. If abortion is made a crime, then surely the woman who has one is a criminal. But, boy, do the doctrinaire suddenly turn squirrelly at the prospect of throwing women in jail.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
You don’t think children become pregnant? There are women who have been victims of incest and they were willing only insomuch as they didn’t have much of a choice but it would not legally be considered rape. There are just too many scenarios. As for the PBA, well, that should already be a criminal action IMHO.
Oh, and BTW, I do think it should be illegal; I’m just not in for punishing (i.e. jailing) the woman. Maybe fining her might be considered but even then it could be disastrous since many of these women are very poor.
I have no problem with punishment consisting of psychiatric treatment if the situation warrants it. I just think that at least in principle (since there is no chance that a law punishing a woman who has an abortion would pass), there should be a criminal penalty for taking a life, or getting someone to end someone’s life for you.
The discussion on this thread is fascinating.
Rape and incest are maybe 1% of all pregnancies that end in abortion. What about the other 99% who got pregnant by having willing, unprotected sex? Are they “victims” too?
Great video - Wonder if those women will think it over and decide on a penalty.
All of them are awful to contemplate. However, as a society, we must.
The sentence would have to be hard enough in order to provide a incentive to keep the baby and to insure the mother doesn’t have another unwanted baby.
Perhaps a mandatory 5 year sentence, serving at least 9 months incarcerated and the remainder spent on probation which requires family planning education and follow up.
I would take another approach - one that I think is already working. Make sure every girl & boy in high school (preferably jr. high) sees the 4-D ultrasounds of in-utero babies at all stages of development. No judgment - just show the evidence of human life. Life is precious, but not everyone has been taught that. Then, I would show them the actual products of abortion mills. The net result: I think I am seeing a lot more teen moms pushing baby carts around with no daddies in sight. Oh well.
The unborn child of a rape victim shouldn’t have the right to life because of his father?
Why punish the child for the acts of the father?
Gosh, you know, I . . . wouldn't have any hesitation at all about throwing Anna Quindlen in jail as an accessory to mass murder of other women's babies.
Then again, Hitlter's propaganda minister—that would be Josef Goebbels, who promoted Nazi anti-Semitism with a zeal not unlike Anna Quindlen's zeal for baby-killing—committed suicide in 1945 because he had some intimation of the fate that lay in store for him.
Maybe jail for Miss Quindlen is too tame. After all, she's too educated not to know a baby is a baby from the moment of conception. How about a Nuremberg-style trial—hanged if found guilty?
Feeling gob-smacked yet, Miss Quindlen?
The article tries to rally indignation that there might be a penalty against women who get abortions, but in reality the response of the protesters at the clinic doesn’t support their point.
The protesters, when asked, did not respond with venom toward the women. They hadn’t even thought about how to “punish” them for their deed. That proves the general public doesn’t want to criminalize women, just save lives. There’s a big difference.
This subject brings out the true feminist in me.
I’m convinced that for victims of rape and incest, having to get up in those stirrups is another violation. For one thing, it’s not just like having a heavy period, no matter what anyone says, unless they have a medical abortion very early.
For another, this is her child, too.
Then, talk about pressure to have an abortion:
These women and girls are told all the usual lies, plus they are subjected to the implication that if they don’t want an abortion, they weren’t really raped. Some feel that they are responsible for family or their husband/boyfriend’s shame and powerlessness.
Abortion is just one more way to enforce the double standard, and underline that it’s a woman’s responsibility to “make it go away.”
ditto. Murder is murder.
Great minds think alike. See post 92.
I should have read all the responses before posting. :)
The penalty should be the same as for any other person who hires a contract hit.
Its murder and all involved should be punished as such.
As with any murder case, there are mitigating factors.
In most cases, I would think that the “provider” is committing pre-meditated murder and should be considered as a first-degree murderer. OTOH, the woman might be a scared child, or a married woman who was hoping for a girl, not a boy. There is a difference.
I agree. Here’s more fuel for the fire.
Ohio Teen Charged With Murder, Killed Girlfriend’s Baby After Abortion Refusal
Life News ^ | August 15, 2007 | Steven Ertelt
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1882182/posts
Posted on 08/16/2007 12:49:25 PM PDT by NYer
Cincinnati, OH (LifeNews.com) — An Ohio teenager accused of attacking his pregnant girlfriend and killing her unborn child after she refused to have an abortion will be charged with murder. Alfonso Price, a 15-year-old, allegedly attacked Kerria Anderson, 18, because she refused to have an abortion of her baby who Price fathered.
Legislatures of the various states have worked out a lot sub classifications of murder to the end of having different laws govern each, with different particulars of enforcement and punishment. This included abortion before the Roe vs Wade decision.
Now I'm not very familiar with those old state laws, but I'll bet they went after the abortionists more then the women. For the heart knows it would be more just to do so.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.