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 ...
(This question of do you punish a mother and all that, seems out of place to me.)
Not sure I agree with you. I’ve thought for years a woman that had an abortion is a murderer. There might be some reasons to have an abortion that are more acceptable than others but it doesn’t change the outcome one bit.
And this pathetic jackass gets to define the rules because???
It’s something Chrissy doesn’t understand, compassion. It is forgiving those of which it could be said “they no not what they do.” And after they understand what they have done, they will need all the compassion they can get.
You mean if I hire a hit man to kill you I’m innocent?
Let’s be intellectually honest. That’s a fair question by Matthews and us anti-abortionists don’t have a good answer.
No= know... crazy autocorrect.
Okay.
Do you think it’s murder, or should be defined as murder?
Or how should it be defined?
That’s a cheap and ineffective way to avoid answering the question?
Why are you avoiding it?
I’m not avoiding anything really. I’m recognizing the provenance of the source. The quizzical fact is that you seem to want to put the onus of the argument on me is puzzling, frankly.
It would have better for them if they were never born
All that aside, we have legal definitions for different categories of causing someone else's death. Wonder why old dead-soul tingles started at murder?
Because the environment right now won’t allow it.
Most of the women freely choosing to have abortions look at it as no different than contraceptives. For many of them, it is their primary form of birth control. They don’t view it as killing at all. Not only that, but they have been conditioned to think that it is a fundamental right, more important than any other (legitimate) right that women have.
There is no other form of homicide in which 20-30% of the population won’t even recognize it as homicide and consider it a right. This must change if we want to effectively protect the unborn.
I would start by educating young women. Once the majority of young women understand that abortion *is* killing a human being, and that the purveyors of abortion are soulless profiteering ghouls, then we can start punishing abortion the same way we punish other forms of homicide. Until then, it won’t work.
I don’t think there is room in the jails and as of present law the abortions are legal. What we think is murder is not murder in the eyes of the law.
That is why we must change the law to a compromise standard that we can live with. Either a very short window, during which many fetuses do not survive in any case(1) < 8 weeks, or a compromise window of 12 weeks so that severe genetic abnormalities can be detected.
After that there should be a clear legal basis for a life that has rights and must be taken into account.
(1) EarlyPregnancyFailure EPF is an inclusive term that comprises incomplete, complete, or inevitable spontaneous abortion; anembryonic gestation (blighted ovum); and embryonic demise (missed abortion) at less than 14 weeks.2
Approximately 15% to 20% of clinically recognized pregnancies end in EPF. Many EPFs occur before pregnancies have been clinically recognized (that is, women mistake them for “late cycles”). It is estimated that up to 60% of all conceptions end in early losses. Chromosomal abnormalities, most commonly translocations and aneuploidy, are responsible for more than half of all spontaneous EPFs. Other genetic defects that are currently impossible to discern by simple karyotype may be the cause of many spontaneous losses.
http://contemporaryobgyn.modernmedicine.com/contemporary-obgyn/content/tags/early-pregnancy-failure/medical-management-early-pregnancy-failure
I’m an attorney. You need mens rea to make out a murder charge. If you have a teen who’s being told it’s not a baby yet, by everyone in her world, not just doctor and family, but the entire culture, and you combine that with coercion, no court well-grounded in the traditional view of murder is going to find mens rea (guilty mind).
BTW, it’s not about intellectual capacity. It’s about what your life situation has conditioned you to believe. Some very smart people believe some very stupid things. We see it all the time here on FR.
Peace,
SR
We have had decades of propaganda in schools to convince the mother that the child is a tissue mass not unlike a tumor and can be excised for the benefit of the mother.
I went to high school in the 50's and don't recall all these teenage pregnancies, so why are they so much more common today? There used to be a risk involved in casual sexual behavior, not anymore.
Why are you avoiding it?
because it’s so much easier and more fun to bash Mathews than attempt to answer his pointed questions, and because to answer them we’d need to come up with actual solutions...which is a lot harder...
Once the majority of young women understand that abortion *is* killing a human being,
are you seriously suggesting these women don’t know abortion kills a human being...?
Very well put -—exDemMom-—very VERY well put. Clear-eyed and to the point.
Doesn't planned parenthood give free contraceptive to any that ask? Your local school likely does, or didn't you know that?
Alan Colmes uses this same premise on his Show if a Caller is Pro Life. He has for years.
Ones personal opinion means nothing. The Law is all that matters.
We have degrees of Homicide Laws and we have degrees of Manslaughter Laws. There is vast disagreement in how those Laws are used.
If a Pregnant Woman abuses Alcohol (a legal substance) and the Unborn Child dies, is she charged with Negligent Homicide? Did she mean to do it? If so, if proven in a Court of Law could it be First Degree Murder?
How about she is on some crazy Diet that damages or kills the Fetus?
The Law is a very complex thing.
IMHO, Viability will be the Thin Red Line. I doubt that Abortion will ever be Illegal, but it will and should be restricted.
I believe, and I could be wrong that Roe v Wade had a viability clause which has never been part of the discussion.
Heck, the Abortion Laws in Liberal Semi-Socialist Europe are tougher than those in the United States, just as the Immigration Laws in third world Mexico are tougher than those in the United States.
Of course, those facts are never part of the discussion in this Country. The Hypocrisy is too inconvenient.
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.