B
- Status
S
surritter
Guest
This just doesn’t make sense. Without laws prohibiting abortion, isn’t that de facto consent to murder of these innocent children? And you DON’T think that such laws should be reinstated???
The question of how to enforce it and who to go after and what punishments should be meted out is a different question from whether it should be on the books as illegal. I will have to check out the book you mention, but I can’t imagine Fr. Pavone saying “nope, we don’t need laws prohibiting abortion.”
The question of how to enforce it and who to go after and what punishments should be meted out is a different question from whether it should be on the books as illegal. I will have to check out the book you mention, but I can’t imagine Fr. Pavone saying “nope, we don’t need laws prohibiting abortion.”
B
BVM_1221
Guest
No, it’s not. Ask any lawyer. To pass a law making abortion illegal is totally meaningless without specific penalties. And it will be those penalties that determine whether some Congress-critter vote yes or no. And it will be those penalties that might deter Physicians from the procedure, and woman from the procedure. Sorry about that. Really
H
Holly3278
Guest
The Church seeks to abolish the brutal murder of the unborn of course! I have never heard of an official proposed punishment but I propose life imprisonment for all who procure or perform an abortion!
R
Rocinante
Guest
i don’t think these are separate questions at all.
it is not enough to say “there ought to be a law…” you have to answer, what law?
when you say it ought to be illegal, i have no idea what that means unless you say what the consequences of doing it are to be and how they will be carried out.
the distinction i am looking for here is between saying something is immoral (we agree that abortion is immoral) and saying that it ought to be illegal (i’m not sure what that even means).
do we agree that it is possible to believe that something is immoral and be unconvinced that there ought to be a law against it? for example, the bible says “honor thy father and mother,” but no one (i should think) wants a law that says you ought to go to jail if you are disrespectful toward your parents.
rocinante
R
Rocinante
Guest
you are talking about (among others) sixteen year old girls here. some of them who were raped by family members. are you sure you have thought this through in saying that such girls out to be imprisoned for life???
R
Rocinante
Guest
i don’t understand. if you think that the republican stance won’t work, why would you feel like you can’t vote for a democrat?You are correct. As a good Catrholic, I regard abortion as a sin. As a good Catholic, I do not vote for Democratic Party candidates. Etc. etc etc…
But in the real world, to impose abortion restrictions on women without a broad consent, simply will not work. :dts:
S
surritter
Guest
Of course they are different questions. Try this:No, it’s not. Ask any lawyer. To pass a law making abortion illegal is totally meaningless without specific penalties. And it will be those penalties that determine whether some Congress-critter vote yes or no. And it will be those penalties that might deter Physicians from the procedure, and woman from the procedure. Sorry about that. Really
Shoplifting of a candy bar and rape are both illegal. But are the punishments the same?
That’s all I was referring to. Abortion should CERTAINLY be illegal. BVM, you seemed to imply that such action is unnecessary. But if I we agree that it should be illegal, then let’s have a meaningful discussion about the separate question of specific punishments; in that regard I would agree with all the other recent posts.
N
NE_Catholic
Guest
I suppose it would go back to pre-1973 where in some states it would be legal, other, not.
Of couse there would still be abortions even where it would be illegal, and this is my biggest fear, both for the mother and the child.
Of couse there would still be abortions even where it would be illegal, and this is my biggest fear, both for the mother and the child.
N
NE_Catholic
Guest
my biggest fear about making abortion completely illegal is the women who will die as a result of trying to terminate their pregnancies through any means. No person can not ignore this fact.
X
xformer7
Guest
There are already laws in every state which cover this crime, so no new “abortion crime” needs to be covered under new law.
The laws against murder are long and well established, and so are the penalties. There are mitigating circumstances to be considered which will determine culpability and sentencing. Again, these standards already exist and don’t need to be reinvented here. So, for example, a woman who procures and abortion in an extremely diminished capacity (for example became pregnant as the result of rape) will receive a lighter punishment (and perhaps none) than a woman procuring an abortion because a child would put a kink in her career plans. The doctor and others complicit will also be treated under laws already on the books.
The laws against murder are long and well established, and so are the penalties. There are mitigating circumstances to be considered which will determine culpability and sentencing. Again, these standards already exist and don’t need to be reinvented here. So, for example, a woman who procures and abortion in an extremely diminished capacity (for example became pregnant as the result of rape) will receive a lighter punishment (and perhaps none) than a woman procuring an abortion because a child would put a kink in her career plans. The doctor and others complicit will also be treated under laws already on the books.
C
Cracker_Mom
Guest
Perhaps a better approach would be moving towards a full consensis of an unborn child’s human rights under the law. Working towards that seems a more positive/proactive approach than imagining what punishment might be imposed on doctors who perform abortions.
Again, healthcare people currently get caught doing all kinds of mischief and after a review & a rap on the knuckles from a licensing board, they eventually are back in practise.Somewhere.At least that’s what I’ve witnessed in our part of the woods.
Again, healthcare people currently get caught doing all kinds of mischief and after a review & a rap on the knuckles from a licensing board, they eventually are back in practise.Somewhere.At least that’s what I’ve witnessed in our part of the woods.
J
John_Pascendi
Guest
well for one thing,casual sex will be abandoned and people will act more like people then barnyard animals.Also ,imagine how many wonderful humans have thus far been lost…what…some 55 million…dead before their time! How many scientists,doctors,artists,coal miners who know how to thank God…etc have we lost.Is’nt it ironic how hollyweird depicts convicts as sympathic creatures,worthy of respect and a second,third etc chance.but has been trumpeting abortion on demand since Peyton place flicks…wonder if there is an agenda there…sorry gotta go,my tea is ready!!!
P
puzzleannie
Guest
rephrase: what does the state actually seek in making murder illegal. Who should be punished? What should the punishment be?
What the Church seeks coincides remarkebly with what the US Constitution alleges to protect: the right to life.
S
surritter
Guest
Excellent point, Xformer and PuzzleAnnie. The laws are already on the books!
Abortion = murder
Murder = already illegal
So we need a constitutional amendment defining the human person. We can’t have a constitutional amendment outlawing abortion, because the Supreme Court would redefine the procedure as another name and say “it’s not really abortion.”
Abortion = murder
Murder = already illegal
So we need a constitutional amendment defining the human person. We can’t have a constitutional amendment outlawing abortion, because the Supreme Court would redefine the procedure as another name and say “it’s not really abortion.”
S
StTommyMore
Guest
As with murders, there would be different degrees of abortion base on circumstances. For example the person who procures an abortion just because birth control failed would be different than a woman pressure into it by a family member, boyfriend etc.
R
rwoehmke
Guest
It seems that we go around and around about this issue. Abortion has been practiced in human society since probably not long after humans got knowledgeable enough to make it happen. It has been legal, illegal, considered morally wrong by some since almost forever. To make it absolutely illegal will certainly cut down on the number performed, but to think it will put an absolute stop to abortion is nonsense. Influencing people’s stand on the matter is probably the most likely route to near success in stamping out this plague. Once a tipping point is reached only then will reasonably effective laws be promulgated and passed. Even then, however there will still be some abortions. No matter how some of us might feel, criminalizing women who have them will absolutely not fly under a democratic form of government. It took over half a century to get any kind of a general health care bill passed. In my opinion making abortion illegal may take just as long or longer, so perseverance is required as is a Supreme Court who would support such legislation.
O
OriginalJS
Guest
Do you have any facts to back up your sense that illegal abortions were safer than present legal ones? I think it is common knowledge that physicians performed illegal abortions before Roe v Wade if the women had the necessary funds. Obtaining an abortion has never been a problem for well-off women.
J
John_Pascendi
Guest
Ah,poor things…I recall the demons left campaign on this very heartrendering issue…they depicted these poor women in ads with a coat hanger and an ally place.It seems they had nothing better to do then use such an item in such a place to murder the innocent being growing in their body…we must always think of that ,never to that same developing baby being suctioned out in pieces or having its head squashed so that it can be hauled out and tossed into a nearby trash can! Notice the above statements are ok but we can go on a picket line and show photos of an aborted baby,too graphic they scream at us in their warm heart tugging way that only the concerned left has!
J
JimG
Guest
I’ve read a number of articles on this over the course of time, but can’t give any definite cites at this point. I would recommend Bernard Nathanson’s Aborting America, for a history of that time, from one who had been pushing for legalization, and some thousands of abortions later, became pro-life. Those pushing for legalization pre-1973 often simply made up statistics which would support their cause.
It’s noteworthy that before 1973, each state had it’s own abortion laws; and they had been passed without much trouble by state legislatures. Some were more liberal than others. There wasn’t nearly as much controversy then as now, since states were allowed to decide, rather than have one agenda forced upon them by seven men on the U.S. Supreme Court.
The pro-choice movement originally concentrated on overturning those state laws, but wasn’t having much success. (NARAL originally stood for “Nat’l Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws.”) It was then they they began actively seeking a test case to take to court. The eventual result was Roe v Wade. (The “Roe” in the case–Norma Corvey–later petitioned to have the decision overturned, but that was not accepted.)
- Status