Why do so many in the pro-life movement want no punishment for women if abortion was illegal?

[BornInMarch]

The fact still remains that this is an overly simplistic way of viewing the problem.

As former posters have mentioned, several abortions take place under some form of duress. Duress tends to invalidate or at least diminish the validity of consent to an act or procedure, which is something that even the ancients recognized.

Moreover, it takes several to tango in this particular case. For abortion to be legal, the government must also be complicit, as well as healthcare professionals, the pharmaceutical industry, the woman’s family and the child’s father (who would be accessories to murder at the very least), and so on.

Finally, let’s not get too bloodthirsty. Remember that even in the days of the Inquistion, not everyone tried or even convicted by their courts was burned at the stake - that’s a Protestant canard. Many of them received lesser punishments.

I understand what you are saying. I can’t speak for others but I myself am not after blood or necessarily revenge; only justice. I want a woman who gets an abortion without coercion to be legally punished because if somebody murdered me for no good reason than I would want that person to be punished as well.

I don’t want women who were coerced to be punished, I don’t want children to be tried as adults, and I don’t want anyone to be given an excessive or cruel punishment.

As for the points you outline below I think you have a very reasonable and thought-out view on the matter.

The bottom line, at least from where I’m sitting is:

1. It’s futile to punish only the woman when so many guilty parties are involved. At the very least, the father (and possibly other accessories, especially the concerned medical “professional” / abortionist) must also receive punishment (something that several men on this forum will furiously reject, given that they subscribe to a rather worldly agenda.)

I agree that women shouldn’t be the only ones punished. People who drive them to illegal abortionists should be punished, as should those who who encourage her to get the abortion, as should those who actually preform the abortion.

1. Lesser punishments seem to be completely appropriate, but they must also carry with them the possibility of rehabilitation and repentance. (For example, community service in an orphanage, or at a facility for physically or mentally disabled children.)

All punishments should carry the possibility for rehabilitation and repentance. Society at large tends to have forgotten that prisons are called Correctional Facilities for a reason; they are supposed to correct bad behavior and turn criminals back into good and productive members of society.

In Chile the punishment for seeking an abortion is 3-5 years (similar to the amount of time a woman can spend in prison if she commits infanticide). In Sweden the punishment for general murder is a maximum of 18, with the court having the ability to add 3 extra years to a sentence if a prisoner’s crime is especially heinous or if said prisoner is not yet rehabilitated. And while in prison the inmates have far better conditions than their United States Counterparts can expect.

In the United States someone who committed a crime, even a serious one, is legally supposed to get a lower sentence if enough mitigating factors are at play (such as lack of prior criminal record, genuine remorse, past circumstances such as abuse, etc).

1. Serial murder is a greater offence than a single murder; punishments should definitely be heavier for abortionists than for the mother or father.

No disagreement on this front.

1. Arguments from outrage are silly.

Not just silly; they are possibly disastrous too. Arguments from anger are why prisoners and ex-convicts in the United States are commonly treated as less-than-human and why recidivism is so outrageously high (no pun intended).
Anger in and of itself can be good and healthy (it is often a reaction to feeling threatened or feeling that there is injustice in the world), but allowing it to go unchecked or untempered is a bad idea.

 

[MaryT777]

What about all the people around the mother who force her into that situation? It’s women who have to deal with unplanned pregnancies, but I can promise you there was a man involved in getting her in that state. Does he get tried? If he knew she was pregnant and refused to support her, forcing her to feel abortion was her only choice, is he an accomplice? Or perhaps a co-conspirator? If her parents threatened to disown her or throw her out if she ever got pregnant, are they to be held liable?

Punishing women obscurs the complexity of relationships and interactions that go into a woman’s decision. If you are going to inspire change it isn’t by introducing more fear. It’s by ensuring women know that there will be a place of love and support for them, no matter what.

Very eloquent and I completely agree. I might imagine some men are not too happy about the prospect of paying child support and it’s common knowledge many are pressured by men and families and others.

Support is indeed what is needed.

Mary.

 

[JPUSC]

Have you checked the OP’s previous posting history?

He thinks married priests should become the norm.

Not hard to pick up the stench of liberalism from stuff like that…

Please!

 

[exnihilo]

I think the reason is sexism, at least that is what I’d describe it as in the framework of our supposedly egalitarian modern culture. Women simply aren’t held as accountable, including in the legal system, as men. When women commit crimes is often excused or blamed on the nearest man.

 

[BornInMarch]

You do realize that Abortion is the murder of an unborn child, right? It’s not just a sexual transgression, it’s a heinous murder. 100% of all successful abortions result in the violent death of an innocent human being.

People talk about how bad “shaming” is, but often forget that there are some things that you should be ashamed of. One of them is murdering children.

 

[exnihilo]

Justice is the objective. You have to pay for wrongs. Shame is a consequence of unjust acts.

We have no ability to police other jurisdictions. But, the US government is more then happy to prosecute you for crimes committed outside its jurisdiction. You’d prosecute it like any other crime they now prosecute that occurs outside of its jurisdiction.

 

[exnihilo]

You could say the same about all laws. I’d say life for any crime that if some evidence suggests a woman had an abortion outside the jurisdiction then you’d investigate. Or, you could ask questions when they come through customs like they already do concerning other possible crimes. Or you could use the communication data our spy agencies collect to ferret out such criminals. For the record I’m against spying but if your point is enforcing laws like this would somehow violate privacy then I’d point out we already have no privacy.

 

[WingsOfEagles]

How do you enforce a law if there is no punishment?

Women generally seek abortions out of fear, not malice. It makes more sense to make abortion access difficult (eliminating abortion clinics and making it illegal for doctors to perform abortions).

 

[BornInMarch]

It is for justice’s sake. By imprisoning people who murder children, and by putting that crime on their criminal record, we declare that their crime is unconscionable and we return dignity to the victim of the murder.

As for travel, ideally abortion will eventually (probably after we’re gone) become illegal worldwide. But in the interim we can make it illegal to travel for the express purpose of obtaining an abortion, and we can enforce this putting someone on a no-fly list if suspected of seeking an overseas abortion or by arresting such people upon their return. The reason women in Ireland go to the UK for abortions is that the Thirteenth Amendment of the Constitution of Ireland allows them to. The Supreme Court of Ireland could just have easily have decided to place the right to life above the right to travel.

 

[exnihilo]

How do you prove people are traveling to commit terrorism or say violate the Neutrality Act? Governments do this now.

Why would this be a theocratic state? Why is having a terrorist no fly list acceptable but not one for abortionists? Both could be wrong. Personally I oppose the terrorist list. But why would one be right and the other wrong?

 

[WingsOfEagles]

How do you prove people are traveling to commit terrorism or say violate the Neutrality Act? Governments do this now.

Why would this be a theocratic state? Why is having a terrorist no fly list acceptable but not one for abortionists? Both could be wrong. Personally I oppose the terrorist list. But why would one be right and the other wrong?

One a much bigger threat to society at large.

 

[exnihilo]

One a much bigger threat to society at large.

Abortion kills far more people in the US then terrorism. Terrorism is nothing compared to abortion.

 

[WingsOfEagles]

Abortion kills far more people in the US then terrorism. Terrorism is nothing compared to abortion.

I’m pro-life, but that’s a very weak argument. Terrorist acts kill people in a setting where they are very fully aware of what is going on and their deaths often directly affect their family members who survive. The acts generally kill multiple people in one go. An abortion takes a life, but that life hasn’t really gotten going yet. An unborn baby does feel pain (definitely by 20 weeks), but how aware that child really is is highly debatable. Yes, that baby has “family”, but they aren’t all that affected by the abortion as the child hasn’t become a part of their lives yet.

 

[BornInMarch]

Actually there are several ways to achieve this goal. For starters the law could require medical professionals to report to authorities if a patient is planning to travel overseas for the purpose of getting an abortion (medical professionals are already required to report to authorities when somebody is planning to commit a serious crime). Based on this report the government can do a risk assessment on the person, giving a warning if the woman is low-risk and putting a twelve month travel restriction on her if she is high-risk.

Likewise if a woman did succeed in getting an abortion overseas and there is sufficient evidence to prove that this was no accident (such as if she bragged about it in a public forum like social media), then

Not all women; only the ones who want to murder children.

Have you ever read John Locke’s Second Treatise of Government? I should repeat that I oppose abortion because and ONLY because I believe that the unborn child is a living human being who deserves the same rights, protections, and dignities of any other human being (that means justice in the event of murder or attempted murder).

It is not because of my religion (I considered abortion wrong even before I decided to find out what the Church taught on it [and in fact there are secular and atheist groups that oppose abortion as well]) and it is not because of my gender (I would oppose abortion regardless of that, and additionally half of the female population opposes legalized abortion [and there are many feminist groups that oppose abortion]).

So please stop trying to make this an issue of gender or an issue of religious freedom, because as far as I am concerned it is ONLY an issue of human rights (specifically the right to life, which I believe should come first).

 

[WingsOfEagles]

Actually there are several ways to achieve this goal. For starters the law could require medical professionals to report to authorities if a patient is planning to travel overseas for the purpose of getting an abortion (medical professionals are already required to report to authorities when somebody is planning to commit a serious crime). Based on this report the government can do a risk assessment on the person, giving a warning if the woman is low-risk and putting a twelve month travel restriction on her if she is high-risk.

Likewise if a woman did succeed in getting an abortion overseas and there is sufficient evidence to prove that this was no accident (such as if she bragged about it in a public forum like social media), then

Overseas medical professionals would not need to comply with our laws. Women would simply not report anything to their American doctors. A 12-month travel restriction seems interesting given pregnancy lasts 9 months. I don’t know of many women who brag about their abortions on social media. Most women keep those things very private and would definitely do so if it was illegal.

 

[exnihilo]

I’m pro-life, but that’s a very weak argument. Terrorist acts kill people in a setting where they are very fully aware of what is going on and their deaths often directly affect their family members who survive. The acts generally kill multiple people in one go. An abortion takes a life, but that life hasn’t really gotten going yet. An unborn baby does feel pain (definitely by 20 weeks), but how aware that child really is is highly debatable. Yes, that baby has “family”, but they aren’t all that affected by the abortion as the child hasn’t become a part of their lives yet.

There have been 60 million abortions (deaths) since Roe vs Wade. In that time there have been I imagine far less than 10,000 terrorist deaths in the US.

You dismiss my argument by basically making a utilitarian argument. You say the babies murdered are less worthy individuals then the people killed by terrorists. You are basically saying a person killed by terrorists is worth more than 6,000 babies killed by abortion. This line of reasoning is used by people to support abortion in the first place. It’s also used to support euthanasia. It is a core belief in the culture of death. You may not like my argument but I’d find another reason to dismiss it.

 

[WingsOfEagles]

Exactly. I think it needs to be recognized that although abortion takes a life, the way to deal with it is very different than the way you deal with a homicidal maniac who shoots people on the street.

 

[pnewton]

Actually there are several ways to achieve this goal. For starters the law could require medical professionals to report to authorities if a patient is planning to travel overseas for the purpose of getting an abortion (medical professionals are already required to report to authorities when somebody is planning to commit a serious crime).

I think some perspective on what can and cannot be done is needed. We cannot legislate out side our borders. We cannot make doctors break doctor-patient confidentiality for the possibility of the law being broken in the future, assuming if it were possible to even write a law that would cover illegal traveling. This was not possible even when the traveling was done from state to state.

You guys are all over the map and you are not capable of answering the question originally posed. If you do not believe that there should be no punishment, you probably lack the insight to understand how someone else could feel that way.

 

[MJDorry]

How do you enforce a law if there is no punishment?

How do you punish droves of people who don’t see what they’re doing as criminal? There are people in the world who might not see stealing or killing as wrong “under the right circumstances”, but personal justifications crumble in the face of the obvious. And the people who do find themselves believing such lies are very few and far between.

While we, who support life, do see committing abortion quite clearly as incredibly sinful, the nuances of the social arguments in favor of “choice” have made this a more complex sin to tackle than murder and thievery.

On top of which, “punishment” is useless in all cases of sin. Negative reinforcement doesn’t work as it should, and we know this now. I do think there should be a price paid, but not punishment. We lock murderers away not to punish them, but to remove them from a society where they are deemed too dangerous to others. Although, a thread of vengeance does unfortunately run strongly through our justice system and social outlook.

But what good would locking aborting mothers do? They have sinned against their own child in their womb, but they have not rendered themselves more dangerous to the society around them. If abortion were wholesale illegal again, I would be in favor of fines where such acts are discovered. Fines because they have ultimately robbed the city of one of its future citizens. But that’s the legal prescription.

The spiritual prescription cannot be enforced, only encouraged, and in this way, the Church and Her faithful must endeavor to bring such women to see the sin and seek forgiveness.

 

[BornInMarch]

On top of which, “punishment” is useless in all cases of sin. Negative reinforcement doesn’t work as it should, and we know this now. I do think there should be a price paid, but not punishment. We lock murderers away not to punish them, but to remove them from a society where they are deemed too dangerous to others. Although, a thread of vengeance does unfortunately run strongly through our justice system and social outlook.

But what good would locking aborting mothers do? They have sinned against their own child in their womb, but they have not rendered themselves more dangerous to the society around them. If abortion were wholesale illegal again, I would be in favor of fines where such acts are discovered. Fines because they have ultimately robbed the city of one of its future citizens. But that’s the legal prescription.

Actually, preventing more crimes isn’t the only reason why we punish criminals. If somebody commits a murder then he gets sent to prison even if he is unlikely to ever kill again, the reason is for justice’s sake. We can’t bring back a murder victim, but by putting the murder in prison we can restore some of the victim’s dignity and make it clear that the victim’s life had intrinsic value.

Locking women up for getting abortions would accomplish the same thing; it would give dignity to their murdered child, it make it clear that the dead child’s life had intrinsic value, and it would demonstrate that we really do consider the unborn child to be just as much a human being as a born child or an adult.

If somebody murdered me in cold blood then I would want that person to go to prison for it, and I am sure most people would as well. We owe it to the dead to at least give them dignity and justice.