Should Abortion Become Illegal

[Starwynd]

Here are some ramifications to consider.

Who would pay for the new space to hold the hundreds of thousands of new convicts? For those interested, here’s a list at how much we’re spending:

ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/exptyptab.htm

(Direct expenditures by criminal justice function, 1982-2005)

Who would go to jail? The woman? The doctor? Both? Anybody who supported the abortion financially?

Would you support the death penalty for those getting the abortion since in some states that means abortion crimes will be eligible for the death penalty should the abortion become defined as murder?

If abortion is to be defined as murder, then that means there will be hundreds of thousands new inmates. Will you be bothered by that?

 

[JesuXPIPassio]

Here are some ramifications to consider.

Who would pay for the new space to hold the hundreds of thousands of new convicts? For those interested, here’s a list at how much we’re spending:

ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/exptyptab.htm

(Direct expenditures by criminal justice function, 1982-2005)

Who would go to jail? The woman? The doctor? Both? Anybody who supported the abortion financially?

Would you support the death penalty for those getting the abortion since in some states that means abortion crimes will be eligible for the death penalty should the abortion become defined as murder?

If abortion is to be defined as murder, then that means there will be hundreds of thousands new inmates. Will you be bothered by that?

That’s a good point, but I think this view is a little flawed. It goes under the supposition that if abortion were outlawed, that the same number of people would still participate in it.

If abortion were to be made illegal, it’s pretty certain that the number of people participating in it would drop. The doctors would fear breaking the law and their oath. Women, then, wouldn’t want to resort to back-alley abortions because they’re safe, so they’d just keep the pregnancy.

So, frankly, I think that the suggestion that hundreds of thousands more people would be incarcerated is a flawed idea.

 

[Mike_Dye]

Here are some ramifications to consider.

Who would pay for the new space to hold the hundreds of thousands of new convicts? For those interested, here’s a list at how much we’re spending:

ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/exptyptab.htm

(Direct expenditures by criminal justice function, 1982-2005)

Who would go to jail? The woman? The doctor? Both? Anybody who supported the abortion financially?

Would you support the death penalty for those getting the abortion since in some states that means abortion crimes will be eligible for the death penalty should the abortion become defined as murder?

If abortion is to be defined as murder, then that means there will be hundreds of thousands new inmates. Will you be bothered by that?

I think that it should be illegal, In fact I can’t think of any reason why it should be legal. I would not support the death penalty for it, but it should be treated like any other murder. And no I am not bothered by new inmates…first of all I think your numbers are way off. If it becomes illegal most abortion mills will shut down, sure it will always exist, but not in any way in the numbers it is today.

 

[Andruschak]

If abortion is to be defined as murder, then that means there will be hundreds of thousands new inmates. Will you be bothered by that?

I would be, if there were hundreds of thousands of new inmates. But will that be the case? Consider…

1. Women with money will still be able to go to Canada, Mexico, Europe etc etc for abortions and there is no way you can stop them.:dts:
2. Poorer women will still be able to go to abortion clinics (not “mills”) that will now be under control of local crime Lords. (That’s where the money is!")
3. Assuming you do arrest them, you may find obtaining convictions may be a problem. Hey Kids…can you pronounce “jury nullification”? I knew you could.
4. Get ready for endless legal challenges and court appeals if women do not get the same sentence as the abortion providers.
5. If women ARE required to have identical prison sentences to the abortion providers, please re-read my 3rd comment.
6. There is no comment #6

 

[historyb]

Here are some ramifications to consider.

Who would pay for the new space to hold the hundreds of thousands of new convicts? For those interested, here’s a list at how much we’re spending:

ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/exptyptab.htm

(Direct expenditures by criminal justice function, 1982-2005)

Who would go to jail? The woman? The doctor? Both? Anybody who supported the abortion financially?

Well I have given quite a lot of thought to this. Make Abortion illegal after a certain time like in 30 days, anything after this will have severe consequences to those that perform them.

Would you support the death penalty for those getting the abortion since in some states that means abortion crimes will be eligible for the death penalty should the abortion become defined as murder?

No, those that would preform them yes.

If abortion is to be defined as murder, then that means there will be hundreds of thousands new inmates. Will you be bothered by that?

No, because I don’t think there would be many more.

 

[JesuXPIPassio]

No, those that would preform them yes.

So, if I may ask just to clarify, you would be for the death penalty in cases like that? Is your pro-life stance because of your strong Catholic background, or is it because of another factor?

I’m bringing in this line of questioning because the death penalty is also against Catholic pro-life standards.

 

[historyb]

So, if I may ask just to clarify, you would be for the death penalty in cases like that? Is your pro-life stance because of your strong Catholic background, or is it because of another factor?

I am pro-life before I became Catholic. I would be for CP for physicians who willfully murdered innocent infants after the law came into effect, not before. I would issue all before a pardon and advise them to go to confession if they are Catholic or right to pray if they are not.

I’m bringing in this line of questioning because the death penalty is also against Catholic pro-life standards.

No it’s not, a Criminal is not innocent and a child is.

From the CCC:

** Capital Punishment **

2266 The State’s effort to contain the spread of behaviors injurious to human rights and the fundamental rules of civil coexistence corresponds to the requirement of watching over the common good. Legitimate public authority has the right and duty to inflict penalties commensurate with the gravity of the crime. The primary scope of the penalty is to redress the disorder caused by the offense. When his punishment is voluntarily accepted by the offender, it takes on the value of expiation. Moreover, punishment, in addition to preserving public order and the safety of persons, has a medicinal scope: as far as possible it should contribute to the correction of the offender.

2267 The traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude, presupposing full ascertainment of the identity and responsibility of the offender, recourse to the death penalty, when this is the only practicable way to defend the lives of human beings effectively against the aggressor.

"If, instead, bloodless means are sufficient to defend against the aggressor and to protect the safety of persons, public authority should limit itself to such means, because they better correspond to the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.

"Today, in fact, given the means at the State’s disposal to effectively repress crime by rendering inoffensive the one who has committed it, without depriving him definitively of the possibility of redeeming himself, cases of absolute necessity for suppression of the offender ‘today … are very rare, if not practically non-existent.’

While it says it doesn’t need to happen always, it is not against a pro-life stance.

 

[JesuXPIPassio]

I am pro-life before I became Catholic. I would be for CP for physicians who willfully murdered innocent infants after the law came into effect, not before. I would issue all before a pardon and advise them to go to confession if they are Catholic or right to pray if they are not.

No it’s not, a Criminal is not innocent and a child is.

From the CCC:

While it says it doesn’t need to happen always, it is not against a pro-life stance.

Thanks for clarifying. I clearly need to brush up on these issues better.

I thought that passage only referred to when the criminal person is still, while in prison, an imminent threat to other people’s safety. In a sense (at least if my understand is correct), killing a murderer like that wouldn’t in essence be the death penalty, but rather just an act of prevention to protect another person.

Would your stance be that *all *abortion doctors ought to be subject to capital punishment, or would it pertain only those who are *dangerously unstable *and able to kill again and again behind bars? It was a little unclear with the previous posts; in your response in post #5, it seemed that you’re advocating the death penalty for all abortion doctors in the scenario where abortion were outlawed.

The way it seems to me, abortion doctors, if thrown in jail, wouldn’t be able to perform abortions anymore; they’re also not likely to kill other people either, so killing those doctors wouldn’t seem to be particularly pro-life.

 

[Tietjen]

I would be, if there were hundreds of thousands of new inmates. But will that be the case? Consider…

1. Women with money will still be able to go to Canada, Mexico, Europe etc etc for abortions and there is no way you can stop them.:dts:
2. Poorer women will still be able to go to abortion clinics (not “mills”) that will now be under control of local crime Lords. (That’s where the money is!")
3. Assuming you do arrest them, you may find obtaining convictions may be a problem. Hey Kids…can you pronounce “jury nullification”? I knew you could.
4. Get ready for endless legal challenges and court appeals if women do not get the same sentence as the abortion providers.
5. If women ARE required to have identical prison sentences to the abortion providers, please re-read my 3rd comment.
6. There is no comment #6

You know though? Despite the possibility of some or all of these problems, I would rather deal with them then allow one more innocent baby be killed because society supports abortion. Let’s overturn RvW and worry about the small stuff as it comes up.

 

[markomalley]

Here are some ramifications to consider.

Who would pay for the new space to hold the hundreds of thousands of new convicts? For those interested, here’s a list at how much we’re spending:

ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/exptyptab.htm

(Direct expenditures by criminal justice function, 1982-2005)

Who would go to jail? The woman? The doctor? Both? Anybody who supported the abortion financially?

Would you support the death penalty for those getting the abortion since in some states that means abortion crimes will be eligible for the death penalty should the abortion become defined as murder?

If abortion is to be defined as murder, then that means there will be hundreds of thousands new inmates. Will you be bothered by that?

Your reasoning is flawed. It is also unconstitutional. Article I Section 9 of the Constitution states, No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

So any woman who has had an abortion before they were illegal, nor would any abortion provider who performed abortions before they were illegal would not be liable if a future law prohibiting abortions was passed.

Hopefully, the result of abortion becoming illegal would be that both women and men would make a change in their behavior…recognizing the potential consequences of their actions (i.e., keeping the legs crossed and the pants zipped if they aren’t willing to deal with the possibility of having a kid as the result of their actions).

But without a corresponding change in the culture, recognizing the dignity of human life and understanding the sanctity of the marriage bed, I am under no illusions that the result will be a cottage industry in illegal abortions. But does that justify accommodation in the flawed mores of the culture? Or does that mean we need to work to change the culture?

I vote for the latter.

 

[vz71]

Here are some ramifications to consider.

Who would pay for the new space to hold the hundreds of thousands of new convicts? For those interested, here’s a list at how much we’re spending:

ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/exptyptab.htm

(Direct expenditures by criminal justice function, 1982-2005)

Too many assumptions are made there to bother with a consideration. Besides, you would want us to consider something else before life?

Who would go to jail? The woman? The doctor? Both? Anybody who supported the abortion financially?

With few exceptions, the women is also a victim.
There may take some hearings to sort it all out, but the doctor should be jailed.

Would you support the death penalty for those getting the abortion since in some states that means abortion crimes will be eligible for the death penalty should the abortion become defined as murder?

I do not support the death penalty in this country.

If abortion is to be defined as murder, then that means there will be hundreds of thousands new inmates. Will you be bothered by that?

No. But again, there are a lot of assumptions made in that statement.

 

[mapleoak]

Who would pay for the new space to hold the hundreds of thousands of new convicts?

What new convicts?

For those interested, here’s a list at how much we’re spending:
ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/exptyptab.htm
(Direct expenditures by criminal justice function, 1982-2005)

Do believe upholding morality and human rights should be dependent on the cost of criminal justice, or the other way around?

Who would go to jail?
The woman? The doctor? Both? Anybody who supported the abortion financially?

The properly convicted. Same as any other case of murder.

Would you support the death penalty for those getting the abortion since in some states that means abortion crimes will be eligible for the death penalty should the abortion become defined as murder?

The death penalty may be used where it is necessary to protect society.

If abortion is to be defined as murder, then that means there will be hundreds of thousands new inmates. Will you be bothered by that?

Laws are not retroactive. You cannot be prosecuted today for something that wasn’t illegal yesterday.

 

[Gamera]

America has the highest per capita incarceration rate of any country on earth, so if you’re interested in reducing the prison population, more power to you. Keeping baby-killing legal, however, isn’ the way to do it.

 

[vz71]

America has the highest per capita incarceration rate of any country on earth, so if you’re interested in reducing the prison population, more power to you. Keeping baby-killing legal, however, isn’ the way to do it.

Actually, to lower the incarceration rate, one may actually start with ending legal abortion. There is a respect for life that would go along with it. And maybe…just maybe…our society will change such that crime goes down.

Respecting life is the key here. Without that,society unravels.

 

[AnotherChance]

Here’s a great link posted to me as an answer on another thread in this forum. It’s about the actual social costs of abortion, if that’s your only concern.

thecostofabortion.com/

I’m not going to support repealing current murder laws to save jail space. Obviously criminalizing abortion would be a deterrent. Also it would erase the current message to youth that says abortion is an OK, even desirable alternative.

 

[Paul2274]

We are made to feel that pregnancy is a disease… don’t we know that. Like everything else… there has to be a name for every “Disoder” and everything has to be a disease (since when did heartburn become ‘reflux DISEASE’… oh… when the drug companies told us it was!!!)

There is a simple cure for the “Disease” of pregnancy… it’s two fold…

1. Men need to have a talk with themselves and get control of the little head with their big head and be real men not little boys running around trying to collect notches on their imaginary belts.
   2)Women need to think also. If you don’t want a child now don’t be in a situation that makes them!

Our society is way to sexualized and we put way to much prioriety on sex… it’s all around us everyday, everywhere you can’t deny it.
Talk to our kids, not just to not have sex, but why to not have sex and why waiting is so much better for everyone. Let them watch Jason Evert or Pam Stenzel (you can watch them free… just look on YouTube they are both there) watch it with them and talk about it. If you keep it in the closet… when they do it they will keep it in the closet from you!

Be a Real Parent to your children… they need you.

Paul

 

[estesbob]

Here are some ramifications to consider.

Who would pay for the new space to hold the hundreds of thousands of new convicts? For those interested, here’s a list at how much we’re spending:

ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/exptyptab.htm

(Direct expenditures by criminal justice function, 1982-2005)

Who would go to jail? The woman? The doctor? Both? Anybody who supported the abortion financially?

Would you support the death penalty for those getting the abortion since in some states that means abortion crimes will be eligible for the death penalty should the abortion become defined as murder?

If abortion is to be defined as murder, then that means there will be hundreds of thousands new inmates. Will you be bothered by that?

The only thing we have to go on is to look at how things were before Roe V Wade. No women or Drs were sent to jail for procuring or having an abortion in the decades prior to Roe V Wade. The Drs, at the most, faced large fines and or losing their license to practice medicine(if dismembering children is practicing medicine in the first place).

The scenario you have posted is the usual strawman set up by abortion aplogists to try ans steer the discussion away for the abject evil they support

 

[LCMS_No_More]

I am pro-life before I became Catholic. I would be for CP for physicians who willfully murdered innocent infants after the law came into effect, not before. I would issue all before a pardon and advise them to go to confession if they are Catholic or right to pray if they are not.

Actaully, under the constitution, a person performing an abortion before an abortion ban went into effect would be guilty of no law as ex post facto laws are specifically forbidden.

 

[estesbob]

I would be, if there were hundreds of thousands of new inmates. But will that be the case? Consider…

1. Women with money will still be able to go to Canada, Mexico, Europe etc etc for abortions and there is no way you can stop them.:dts:

Abortion is illegal in Mexico. I guess that since rich people can afford more cocaine than poor people we should legalize that to.

1. Poorer women will still be able to go to abortion clinics (not “mills”) that will now be under control of local crime Lords. (That’s where the money is!")

This was not the case prior to Roe. There has never been any involvment in Abortion by organized crime-probably becuase even though they have very few scruples killing children is something they frown on.

1. Assuming you do arrest them, you may find obtaining convictions may be a problem. Hey Kids…can you pronounce “jury nullification”? I knew you could.

One of the more absurd arguments I have seen put forth to trying to defend the indefensible.

1. Get ready for endless legal challenges and court appeals if women do not get the same sentence as the abortion providers.

[5) If women ARE required to have identical prison sentences to the abortion providers, please re-read my 3rd comment.

Assuming either the provider or procurer wnet to prision-which most certanly was not the case prior to Roe being imposed on the country.

I would suugest we all go out and buy straw futures as it is being used at an enourmous rate in this thread.
[/quote]

 

[mapleoak]

Actaully, under the constitution, a person performing an abortion before an abortion ban went into effect would be guilty of no law as ex post facto laws are specifically forbidden.

Exactly, since laws cannot be retroactive.