Posted on 01/28/2017 9:31:12 AM PST by governsleastgovernsbest
Chris Matthews gave generally respectful treatment to pro-life activist Abby Johnson, who appeared on last night’s Hardball in the context of discussing the March for Life. But Matthews challenged Johnson on the position—generally adopted by the pro-life movement—that the only person who should be punished is the doctor performing the abortion, and not the woman who chose to have one.
Said Matthews: “If abortion’s a murder and the person who goes to an abortion clinic is given no sanctions, no punishment whatever, there’s something that doesn’t square there . . . if you believe it’s murder, you go after the person who went to the clinic to have the abortion. Or else you treat her like a child, a vulnerable person who’s not really a grownup . . . Going after the doctor is a cute way of avoiding the question. If it’s murder, act on it. If it’s not, stop saying it.”
View the video here.
(Excerpt) Read more at legalinsurrection.com ...
Tucker Carlson recently defined Matthews:
“A volcano of dumbness.”
Tucker is brilliant.
Some of these “women” demanding abortions are “children”.
unless they are forcing women to have abortions by returning them physically, the woman is the prime murderer. She has the innocent life under her control and she requests the abortion and she submits to it.
The solicitor: the one seeking the abortion for “convenience”
“Actually, unless the woman self aborts, one would go after the person or persons who performed the abortion.”
Woman who have abortions are full and willing participants in homicide.
WHY OH WHY DOES ANYONE BOTHER TALKING TO THIS ASSHOLE CHRIS MATTHEWS????? NO ONE WATCHES HIM! WHAT A JOKE! He needs his guests to give him credibility way more than his guests need him to give him credibility. HERE ( and I could hardly bear more than just skimming it) he tells his guest that she’s being “cute” because she emphasizing punishing the doctor rather than the woman, so Chris drags out a piece of footage from Trump that was at odds with that,as if she was to be expected to follow the guidelines laid out by Dear Leader Trump (in that interview. Trump allowed himself to be put into a trick bag by Matthews,he should NEVER do that again. ). I would have nothing to do with this disgusting pseudo-journalist if I were in the Trump Administration, or way in any way associated with the interests of the Trump Administration.
“No, you go after the abortionist and the solicitor.”
Abortions do not take place unless the woman consents to the homicide of her child.
She is the responsible party.
Earlier last year, a question on whether, if abortions (except to save the life of the mother) were outlawed, mothers should be punished if they have abortions was answered by Donald Trump, "There has to be some form of punishment."
But Trump's answer generated a number of articles by people who claimed to be pro-life advocates and state that a baby is a human person from the moment of conception. However, the articles strongly denounced the view that "There has to be some form of punishment" and advocating the historical view that women have not been charged or punished under the law for aborting their own children.
4 Reasons Donald Trump’s Abortion Answer Was A Betrayal Of Pro-Lifers by Mollie Hemingway
Punishing Women for Abortion — Trump Contradicts Centuries of Legal Experience by Clarke Forsythe
When Abortion Was Illegal, Women Were Not Jailed for Having Abortions. Here’s Why by Clarke Forsythe
No Pro-Life American Advocates Punishment for Abortion by Bethany Goodman
3 Reasons Trump Was Wrong On Punishing Women For Abortion by Ben Shapiro
Many of the articles contained vicious attacks and insults against Donald Trump and his campaign for the Presidency. It should also be noted that these attacks on Trump were not because of his anti-abortion position that allows abortions in cases of rape and incest.
Setting aside the questions of extenuating circumstances and what kind of punishment might be considered, some of these articles pushed the claim that a mother who deliberately has an abortion is neither the perpetrator, nor an accomplice, nor a conspirator in the murder of the child in her womb, but rather a victim herself. This would seem to take the perversion, "victimless crime," and pervert it further into a "crimeless victim" (the aborted child).
If the pro-life movement, as exemplified in these linked articles, does not want such a gaping hole in its argument opposing abortion (which Chris Matthews now seems to be exploiting), it needs to consider the role of justice in its pro-life position, not only for the politicians, judges, doctors, and businessmen who have participated in the abortion industry, but also the mother who participates in the abortion. Otherwise such a pro-life position advocated in the linked articles is reduced from that of an abortion choice being murder to a morally equivalent one of choosing the wrong color of socks to put on.
If you are going to go after the mother for getting an abortion then you should also go after the father as an accessory after the fact.
You ask some good questions for someone from San Diego , Dilbert (see Roseanne Roseannadanna on SNL) But questions like that are now to be seen as quaint historical artifacts in a subject and issue that I am convinced will NEVER be discussed openly and honestly. It’s all demagoguery. It’s all distortion, and gross overstatement. On my part, one ofthe questions I ask is, as you keep pushing your NEVER AGAIN graphic with the woman holding up the wire coathanger, actually HOW MANY of these type of self-aborts have ever actually occurred? And even multiiplying those numbers by a hundred, how do they match up with the verifiable number ofLEGAL abortions made possible by Roe V. Wade? And how could all this happen in a period of social history in which contraception is available to everyone and in some cases FREE????
You’re cutting to the chase way too quickly. That might make the issue more appealing to you, but the actual discussion is already far beyond that.
I would go after the abortionists first. They use lies and strong-arm tactics to pressure women into having abortions. They send their sales staff into high schools to lie to young girls and try to convince them that people who talk about the baby just want to suppress their rights. The propaganda surrounding abortion is complex and sophisticated.
Until we break through that propaganda and educate young women, attempts to control abortion through punitive legal measures will most likely fail. We have to educate. We have to counter the lies that somehow, abortion is the only “right” that women have or need.
(We have a long history before 1973 of abortions being regulated and/or banned in many states.Why does nobody talk about how those laws were enforced then, and who suffered legal sanctions due to the action then?? Isn’t that relevant to the debate?)
The past can be looked at and used as guidelines.
The usual muddying of the waters. There’s the matter of Roe vs Wade being overturned, which only means that abortion laws would be determined state by state. The second matter is whether abortion is murder or not. (Note that he very quickly goes from hounding her over whether it’s murder to hounding her as if she said that it was.) Whether it is murder or not would be a matter for each state.
“Until we break through that propaganda and educate young women, attempts to control abortion through punitive legal measures will most likely fail.”
Society has always controlled homicide by punitive means.
Why would we control the homicide of the unborn any differently?
Unless they're not. I personally know of situations where there was intense coercion (her own dad) combined with deliberate medical misinformation, back in the day when the pro-abort lobby monopolized the media narrative. Difficult, maybe impossible, to make a case for mens rea under such conditions. No mens rea, no murder. More like an accidental death. That protection would NOT apply to those who were neither misinformed nor coerced.
Peace,
SR
let’s just forget Chrissy
“go after the father as an accessory after the fact”. Uhhh, yeah, assuming you can find him.
“No mens rea, no murder. More like an accidental death. That protection would NOT apply to those who were neither misinformed nor coerced.”
Hang on, are you saying the women do not have the intellectual capacity to know right from wrong and cannot comprehend homicide of a child?
What about the mother of the six month old child that under the coercion of her boyfriend murders the baby?
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.