A
Arkansan
Guest
None of us knows the evidence. That doesn’t mean there wasn’t any.
11 years in jail for a stillbirth: did the Church in El Salvador support this legislation?
- Status
F
FiveLinden
Guest
So what sentence is appropriate for a raped woman who uses the morning after pill, which I understand Catholics consider to be an abortion. Similar to the penalty for murder? Or less?
M
mythbuster1
Guest
Governments have a duty to punish murder, but this must be balanced against their duty to avoid punishing the innocent. To that end, it is proper that the government bear the burden of proof of demonstrating that a homicide occurred, that the accused’s deliberate act caused the victim’s death, and that there was malicious intent on the part of the accused. If any of these elements is lacking, there is no murder.
A
Arkansan
Guest
The same penalty that would apply if a recently-raped woman murdered the already born child of her rapist.Arkansan:
So what sentence is appropriate for a raped woman who uses the morning after pill, which I understand Catholics consider to be an abortion. Similar to the penalty for murder? Or less?
Edit: Actually, in the case you describe the correct punishment would probably be for attempted murder, since the actual fact of homicide would be unprovable.
Last edited:
W
Werbenjagermanjensen
Guest
You think a woman who may or may not have been pregnant should be charged for attempted murder for taking a legal drug that may or may not have increased the risk of a miscarriage of a blastocyst? That seems like quite a stretch. The Church itself doesn’t enforce any kind of excommunication for abortions that are unknown and merely probable.
P
Phemie
Guest
As would attempted murder if you couldn’t prove there was actually someone to kill.FiveLinden:
The same penalty that would apply if a recently-raped woman murdered the already born child of her rapist.Arkansan:
So what sentence is appropriate for a raped woman who uses the morning after pill, which I understand Catholics consider to be an abortion. Similar to the penalty for murder? Or less?
Edit: Actually, in the case you describe the correct punishment would probably be for attempted murder, since the actual fact of homicide would be unprovable.
N
neophyte
Guest
Even the sins of adults are treated in light of their subjective culpability.
Yours included.
Last edited:
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
Murder is the intentional illegal killing of an innocent human being.
In the US, abortion has the protection of law. It is killing, it is immoral killing, but, those in the pro-life world lose credibility calling abortion “murder”. Makes those folks sound a little crazy.
N
neophyte
Guest
Murder does not become non-murder merely because the State says it’s legal.
In the Antebellum South, the murder of black people had the protection of law, as did the murder of Jews in Nazi Germany. That didn’t mean it wasn’t murder.
What makes one sound crazy is rationalizing how murder is not really murder, as you are doing here.
A
Arkansan
Guest
Obviously, if abortion were illegal at all stages, the morning after pill would also be banned.Arkansan:
You think a woman who may or may not have been pregnant should be charged for attempted murder for taking a legal drug that may or may not have increased the risk of a miscarriage of a blastocyst? That seems like quite a stretch. The Church itself doesn’t enforce any kind of excommunication for abortions that are unknown and merely probable.
What I said is consistent with the way the law works generally. If you shoot a deer while believing it to be a human, that is attempted murder legally speaking (the low probability of the crime becoming known notwithstanding).
Canon law generally doesn’t punish attempted crimes with anything more than a penance, unless public scandal results. Obviously, secular law does punish attempted crimes severely, and wisely so, since it would be absurd to allow dangerous criminals to go free simply because their crime failed.
This sort of sloppy thinking is why I have no faith in the mainstream American pro-life movement.Arkansan:
Even the sins of adults are treated in light of their subjective culpability.
Yours included.
In case it isn’t obvious, the purpose of the justice system isn’t to punish sins. It exists to punish crimes based on objective evidence, not to make subjective judgments about the spiritual state of defendants.
I’m not sure what any of what you said has to do with what I said.
A
Arkansan
Guest
It is a mark against Ireland that it has laws permitting abortion in any circumstance. If there is danger of the press using maternal deaths (whether caused by medical negligence or by observance of the abortion ban) to promote abortion, the solution is to prohibit the press from promoting abortion, not to legalize it.
I’ve never seen any evidence that the law in El Salvador is misapplied. If your argument is that they should adopt a long arm statute to punish Salvadorans who commit murder in foreign countries, then by all means I agree.
I’ve never seen any evidence that the law in El Salvador is misapplied. If your argument is that they should adopt a long arm statute to punish Salvadorans who commit murder in foreign countries, then by all means I agree.
A
Arkansan
Guest
Why not? What possible good comes from allowing the press to advocate mass murder?
You objected to the law being disproportionately directed at poor women. This is the case because rich women can afford to travel abroad. I assumed that since you were complaining about this, you actually cared and would support laws to make the situation more equal.
A
Arkansan
Guest
As best as I can tell, all the evils in question have resulted from liberalization wrt the press. Claiming that censorship doesn’t work because things turned bad after it was abandoned is nonsensical. It’d be like claiming that if you switched from eating food to cyanide and then died, your death was caused by all the food you ate.
And many countries, both with abortion bans and without, have laws which allow their citizens to be prosecuted for crimes committed abroad. E.g. if an American goes to Thailand to have sex with child prostitutes, their chance of getting caught is low, but if they do get caught they can potentially spend the rest of their life in federal prison.
And many countries, both with abortion bans and without, have laws which allow their citizens to be prosecuted for crimes committed abroad. E.g. if an American goes to Thailand to have sex with child prostitutes, their chance of getting caught is low, but if they do get caught they can potentially spend the rest of their life in federal prison.
A
Arkansan
Guest
Such prosecutions are rare, but they still have some deterrent effect.
In any case, you brought up the issue, not me.
In any case, you brought up the issue, not me.
N
neophyte
Guest
Prior to Roe v. Wade the law treated the abortionist as the criminal, and the woman and child both as victims. This is because, objectively, they both were; as has been said, a women typically doesn’t want an abortion as she might want a fudge sundae, but rather as a trapped animal wants to gnaw off its foot to escape a trap.
A
Arkansan
Guest
American law prior to Roe v. Wade was wrong on this issue. Murderers ought to be punished, not deemed the victims of their own crimes.
As I said before, I believe that women should be treated as adults.
As I said before, I believe that women should be treated as adults.
E
Elf01
Guest
I understand that it’s managed for euthanasia, so should be possible for abortion.
Just hoping things don’t get worse.
Just hoping things don’t get worse.
S
starshiptrooper
Guest
Yes, I would. Hiring a hitman to do your dirty work is murder, no matter who the target is.
S
starshiptrooper
Guest
Based on the Objectivist writing I have read, Rand’s position was based on faulty biological knowledge. I had no idea that I was obliged to agree with everything she wrote though.
S
starshiptrooper
Guest
Perhaps that is because consensual sex is not a crime, even if the female party winds up pregnant.
- Status