Abortion is Declared Illegal- Then What?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Inspired18
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I

Inspired18

Guest
I hope I posted this in the right place. Sorry if I didn’t! Still getting used to the forums…

Some say, change hearts, not laws. I can’t say I agree with that, but say we win that battle, and abortion is declared illegal again across the 50 states. What is next? How is that crime handled? I have no answers for this. Is the mother prosecuted? The doctor? I need to work this out in my head. Maybe we won’t know fully until we cross that bridge, but I would love to talk about this.
 
There were state laws against abortion prior to 1973. I imagine those laws would be reinstated.

ICXC NIKA
 
I’d say go back to the precedents from the sixties and re-examine them in light of how we determine justice now.

Then is the gov’t would back off HMC, I think we could do some real good for women in difficult situations and their children.
 
Before 1973, every state had its own laws regulating the practice of abortion. Some laws were more liberal than others. It was the SCOTUS decision in Roe v Wade which invalidated all those laws. If Roe v Wade is overturned, either those laws would revert to thier prior status, or states would enact new laws.

Before 1973, there were penalties for performing an abortion.They were universally applied to abortionists, not to women who came to them for abortion.

I don’t see a big problem however. Even today, with liberal abortion laws throughout the nation, the huge majority of physicians have no desire to perform abortions. Many in the pro-choice camp decry the lack of abortion providers. If doctors are unwilling to kill the unborn for profit, there won’t be many abortions. But as long as it’s legal, the few who will perform them make big bucks.

The answer to “then what” is that states would enact their own laws. We would simply be in the same position that we were always in prior to 1973.
 
There were state laws against abortion prior to 1973. I imagine those laws would be reinstated.

ICXC NIKA
Iffy, since it is the Supreme Court that would have to do it.

If they declared (correctly) that a human in utero was entitled to the same human rights that apply under the law, that would automatically preempt any state or local laws.
 
Even tho I am not Catholic, I think I understand why the church takes the stand it does against abortion. I think the OP asks an excellent question. Let’s say abortion is declared illegal tomorrow. Would such a law end abortion? Would such a law remove the element of choice? Would the number of abortions decrease as a result of such a law? Would a law against abortion do any good whatsoever? My answer to all of these questions is “NO”. To support my answer with credible data, let’s use our current laws against the the production and use of illicit drugs for comparison. Have laws against drug use ended drug use? No. Have laws against drug use removed the element of choice of from drug use? No. Has the number of drug users decreased as a result of laws against drug use? No. Have laws against the use of illicit drugs done anything good for our society? In my honest opinion, NO. I wonder what makes anyone think laws against abortion will be any more successful than laws against illicit drugs?
 
Some states could keep it legal and safe while further working towards rare. Others would enact there own laws. I’m not sure if a woman could cross state lines to choose a safe and legal abortion based on her own personal faith and beliefs, following prayer and consultation witn her dr or not. If not, abortion will not go away. Some women might be forced to resort back to unsafe abortions or those backalley ones as before 1973.
 
Even tho I am not Catholic, I think I understand why the church takes the stand it does against abortion. I think the OP asks an excellent question. Let’s say abortion is declared illegal tomorrow. Would such a law end abortion? Would such a law remove the element of choice? Would the number of abortions decrease as a result of such a law? Would a law against abortion do any good whatsoever? My answer to all of these questions is “NO”. To support my answer with credible data, let’s use our current laws against the the production and use of illicit drugs for comparison. Have laws against drug use ended drug use? No. Have laws against drug use removed the element of choice of from drug use? No. Has the number of drug users decreased as a result of laws against drug use? No. Have laws against the use of illicit drugs done anything good for our society? In my honest opinion, NO. I wonder what makes anyone think laws against abortion will be any more successful than laws against illicit drugs?
You don’t need to resort to an analogy with doubtful connections to abortion to decide the question. You can look at abortion itself. In times and places where abortion is against the law, abortion rates have historically been lower. There is no doubt that since 1973 the number of abortions per capita in the US has exploded. Using drug policy to analyze what might happen to abortion is of questionable accuracy because there are factors at play in the drug scene that are not at play for abortion and vice-versa.
 
I hope I posted this in the right place. Sorry if I didn’t! Still getting used to the forums…

Some say, change hearts, not laws. I can’t say I agree with that, but say we win that battle, and abortion is declared illegal again across the 50 states. What is next? How is that crime handled? I have no answers for this. Is the mother prosecuted? The doctor? I need to work this out in my head. Maybe we won’t know fully until we cross that bridge, but I would love to talk about this.
We need to immediately go after artificial contraception, eliminating it from society, in order to make any abortion law effective. I advocate eliminating contraception as the means to ending abortion.

The culture of recreational sex, enabled and driven by widespread acceptance and use of contraception, is what creates the demand for abortion. Remove contraception and a whole host of social ills cure themselves. The demand for abortion will dry up within one or two generations, porn addiction, STD, unwed mothers, fatherless children… all will heal themselves when the culture of recreational sex is reversed.

This is part of the reason why Blessed John Paul II is a saint. His catechesis on Thelogy of the Body is groundbreaking, and teaches us why contraception is a grave evil.

To the point of the OP, the we can change the laws and make abortion a felony murder, but I don’t think the demand for abortion will dry up until the culture of recreational sex is dismantled. That means eliminating contraception.

-Tim-
 
You don’t need to resort to an analogy with doubtful connections to abortion to decide the question. You can look at abortion itself. In times and places where abortion is against the law, abortion rates have historically been lower. There is no doubt that since 1973 the number of abortions per capita in the US has exploded. Using drug policy to analyze what might happen to abortion is of questionable accuracy because there are factors at play in the drug scene that are not at play for abortion and vice-versa.
I use the comparison because these are both hot-button contemporary moral issues. The fact that one is legal and the other is not helps give a sense of contrast. Personally I find it the epitome of hypocrisy when killing and unborn child is labeled a “choice” and smoking a joint is labeled a “crime”. But that’s just me…

Perhaps you could provide some data to support your claim that abortion rates historically have been lower in times and places where abortion is illegal.
 
I use the comparison because these are both hot-button contemporary moral issues. The fact that one is legal and the other is not helps give a sense of contrast. Personally I find it the epitome of hypocrisy when killing and unborn child is labeled a “choice” and smoking a joint is labeled a “crime”. But that’s just me…

Perhaps you could provide some data to support your claim that abortion rates historically have been lower in times and places where abortion is illegal.
I’m sure that if there was evidence to the contrary you would have confronted me with it.
 
To the OP

I think the only real answer is …we would help those pregnant women. If the billions of dollars weren’t going into their demise, it could be used to help them get secure. Slowly, there would be fewer illegal abortions.

At least that is what I would hope for.
 
I’m sure that if there was evidence to the contrary you would have confronted me with it.
In other words you have no evidence to support your claim.

I believe I have given a valid reason to support my claim that a law against abortion will not reduce the demand for or the number of abortions. If you can show that the demand and/or number of abortions was significantly less per capita before abortion became legal in the US, I will change my mind. Until then, I will stand by what I have already said.
 
I hope I posted this in the right place. Sorry if I didn’t! Still getting used to the forums…

Some say, change hearts, not laws. I can’t say I agree with that, but say we win that battle, and abortion is declared illegal again across the 50 states. What is next? How is that crime handled? I have no answers for this. Is the mother prosecuted? The doctor? I need to work this out in my head. Maybe we won’t know fully until we cross that bridge, but I would love to talk about this.
If Roe Vs Wade were overturned, the State laws regarding abortion would come back into effect. Prior to Roe V Wade, some states did have legalized abortion, and those laws would continue. Other States still have anti-abortion laws on the books complete with legal penalties. It would then be up to the courts and legislature to sort out the laws, propose updates, etc.
 
Then we be prepared to deal with people protesting, complaining, and backstreet abortions.

Its a messy situation either way. Stay strong. 🙂
 
  1. I dont’ think it’d be feasible to just ban it over night, I’d say we’d see a gradual banning of abortion. The social mindset isn’t at that point where the unborn child are valued enough. Sucks, but is true. So it needs to say, ban all the late term abortions, then say ban it after 12 weeks, and then say ban it for all social reasons, then phase out abortion for rape/incest, foetal defect, IVF reductions [in fact, lets ban IVF while we’re at it] and then ban it for the medically incorrect idea of “health of mother”. No medical condition requires the death of the foetus to save the mother. Ending the pregnancy can help, but that doesn’t have to result in a dead baby.
  2. The law is not an ogre. If a woman shows up at an ED miscarrying, there are ways you can tell that something was done to cause it. Doctors are not stupid. So women wouldn’t be hammered by police questioning if they have a bit of spotting in the first trimester.
  3. If a woman is suspected of abortion, she would be investigated in the same way as any other person suspected of murder. Was there motive? Did she act on her own accord? Were there others involved? Did those others force her? Family, friends, boyfriend? Is she a minor? Have a deminished culpibility from mental illness, intellectual special needs, was she emotionally compromised, raped/incest for example?
If that woman got pregnant, decided on abortion with full intellectual and mental stability, sought out an illegal abortionist, went to that abortionist, paid that abortionist, underwent the abortion, then she is a murderer. And what punishment is due for murder in your particular state? That’s her punishment. [Granted, I dont’ beleive in the death penalty].

This might be hard to stomach for the average pro-abort, and even some pro-lifers, locking up a woman for “aborting an unwanted foetus”. But you need to view the foetus as a human being, an individual, a person. If someone murdered a child would you be so blasee?

If we want to support the claim that the unborn child is a full human person with the right to life, we must legally prosecute those who illegally murder that child. What sort of message does it send if the law says “abortion is murder, it is illegal, the zygote/embryo/foetus is a human being with the right to life, oh, but if you kill them you just get three weeks community service”.

We do our side no favours if we get squeamish about this question.

I think we’d see very few illegal abortions if it was fully banned and fully investigated and prosecuted.
 
I hope I posted this in the right place. Sorry if I didn’t! Still getting used to the forums…

Some say, change hearts, not laws. I can’t say I agree with that, but say we win that battle, and abortion is declared illegal again across the 50 states. What is next? How is that crime handled? I have no answers for this. Is the mother prosecuted? The doctor? I need to work this out in my head. Maybe we won’t know fully until we cross that bridge, but I would love to talk about this.
I would be OK with treating abortion exactly like we treat anyone who murders their (post-natal) child, which is to say lengthy prison sentences. I gather that’s not the norm, though. The obvious idea would be to look at the time in history when abortions were at their lowest point and try to recreate those circumstances to the greatest extent possible.
 
I would be OK with treating abortion exactly like we treat anyone who murders their (post-natal) child, which is to say lengthy prison sentences. I gather that’s not the norm, though. The obvious idea would be to look at the time in history when abortions were at their lowest point and try to recreate those circumstances to the greatest extent possible.
I would imagine that abortion was most rare when it was physically dangerous for the woman, I.e., before 1900. No one wants to see those days again.

I’d think that recreating the legal framework that existed ante 1973 would be adequate.

ICXC NIKA
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top