How much time did women who had abortions before Roe v Wade serve?If the secular authorities once again consider abortion a crime, how much time should a women convicted of aborting her child serve?
christianitytoday.com/ct/2007/augustweb-only/133-22.0.html
Yes. In previous generations there was an implicit contract: ‘if I get pregnant, you will marry me.’ OK, so it might have been an shotgun marriage, a lot of which were more lasting that today’s marriages. In the absence of marriage, there were and are, child support laws.Shouldn’t a man who impregnates a woman be responsible for the health of the pregnant woman until she gives birth, and for the child’s welfare (including taking care of the mother so that she might care for the child) until the child is an adult?
If, by “improved in quality,” you mean, “no premarital sex,” that just might work.Nobody has an abortion for fun, but because they can see no other way to survive. Perhaps if life was improved in quality all around, there would be no need for such things.
A good lawyer COULD argue that a woman with an unwanted pregnance is often under enough stress to qualify for exoneration. One pro-lifer described the panic as akin to that of an animal who would chew off its own leg to get out of a trap.So the doctors are culpable, but not the women? Are you implying that women are too infantile to make their own choices and be responsible for them?
You are arguing that a man who gets a woman pregnant outside of marriage should be held to the full responsibility of fatherhood. Good idea! In the real world, these guys often force the woman into an abortion. I read somewhere that the leading cause of death among single pregnant women is murder – by the father of the child. (sorry, I don’t have the source)And why should women be the only ones responsible/culpable for the termination of the pregnancy if Sr Sally’s view is taken? What about the men who impregnate the women? Shouldn’t a man who impregnates a woman be responsible for the health of the pregnant woman until she gives birth, and for the child’s welfare (including taking care of the mother so that she might care for the child) until the child is an adult?
Who said anything about capital punishment?Hm, yes…perhaps we should kill (or imprison for life) both the woman who has an abortion and the man who impregnates her. Brilliant, and so pro-life!
Huh? Sometimes you hear people say how hard it was to make the decision to abort; how the woman struggled; how painful it was. Then it’s OK to kill the baby. Right?Nobody has an abortion for fun.
No, but that they’re obviously in a rather vulnerable emotional condition. If we were going to blame them, you’d say we weren’t compassionate.So the doctors are culpable, but not the women? Are you implying that women are too infantile to make their own choices and be responsible for them?
Yeah, we call that marriage, but you’d probably think a shotgun wedding is bad. And we did mention, and you objected, that abortionists, not women, were penalized.And why should women be the only ones responsible/culpable for the termination of the pregnancy if Sr Sally’s view is taken? What about the men who impregnate the women? Shouldn’t a man who impregnates a woman be responsible for the health of the pregnant woman until she gives birth, and for the child’s welfare (including taking care of the mother so that she might care for the child) until the child is an adult?
Except we were saying that abortionists, not women, go to jail. And you were complaining about that, too.Hm, yes…perhaps we should kill (or imprison for life) both the woman who has an abortion and the man who impregnates her. Brilliant, and so pro-life!
Actually, there are a few people who have abortions “just for the experience”.Nobody has an abortion for fun, but because they can see no other way to survive. Perhaps if life was improved in quality all around, there would be no need for such things.
Whatever the laws of this country would decide is what it should be.The woman should serve whatever time anyone else serves, who hires an assassin while in a desperate situation.
Advocating murder is the same as murder itself. It is wrong. TO murder a human is murder no matter how you work word play. I disagree with 99% of the excuses for abortion, but I would never advocate murdering anyone. To do so reduces one to the same level as the abortionist.The abortionist should be killed: because they’re not as decent as professional hitmen, many of whom won’t take contracts involving the death or endangerment of children.
Only if he assisted. Did you know we have “conspiracy to commit murder?”So then, Hastrman, the father of the unwanted child…should he serve the same penalty as the mother? Or perhaps castration?
Only if he went along with it. Did you know we have “conspiracy to commit murder?”So then, Hastrman, the father of the unwanted child…should he serve the same penalty as the mother? Or perhaps castration?
I agree. If a woman is threatened with severe violence or death…she is being coerced against her will.Only if he went along with it. Did you know we have “conspiracy to commit murder?”
If he put her up to it, she shouldn’t serve any penalty.
As am I. Or in the event the male refuses to marry, then strong laws need to be enacted forcing the father of the child to bear full responsibility financially for the child and the mother. Irresponsibility is a crime, as well as a sin.I’m in favor of shotgun weddings, which you probably aren’t. I’m in favor of making men take responsibility for their actions.
You, on the other hand, are in favor of letting them off scott free, and murdering innocents in the process. The likes of you, copping a superior attitude with me is frankly offensive. Your opinions make you complicit in 40 million lives’ worth of blood guilt, and you take a snide attitude with me?
I can remember days when not only was a girl or women viewed in a socially unacceptable light if she got pregnant out of wedlock, but also the boy or man was. She because she allowed herself to fall prey to him, and he because he was a predator and louse.Heh. Surely even you see the irony in that?
But siring a child out of wedlock is not worthy of being killed: taking a life is. If killing or castrating men for siring illegitimate children would result in fewer unwanted pregnancies, why not just kill liars and pickpockets too? That’d mean less theft and lying.I don’t think you have any idea just what I am in favor of, Hastrman. And I didn’t imply anything about you. You’re doing just fine all by yourself.
If the penalty for a man impregnating a woman out of wedlock or failing to support his child carried the penalty of castration or death, I’m pretty sure that would result in fewer unwanted pregnancies.
You are either inexperienced or poorly informed. Many people have or urge abortions because they do not want children. Survival is virtually never at issue. It is always a convenience issue, like throwing out the old batteries in the TV remote control.Nobody has an abortion for fun, but because they can see no other way to survive. Perhaps if life was improved in quality all around, there would be no need for such things.
What? Where did you get that from what I said? If a man decides to make a woman have an abortion (which is murder) then he’s a murderer; if she makes that decision, she’s the murderer. The abortionist is an assassin in either case. What’s complicated about that?There was no ad hominem there, or anywhere.
So then, men are NOT inherently responsible for the lives of their children, let alone the well-being of the women bearing those children? Please be clear.
I believe the correct term is misandrist.Obviously you are incapable of a reasoned debate, but can only accuse everyone else of being a crypto-mysogynist. It’s puerile and offensive.