How shall we punish women who commit murder by having abortions?
Those who vehemently oppose abortion steadfastly claim that abortion is “murder.” They want to make it illegal for any woman to have an abortion.
Therefore, it seems fair to ask anti-abortionists a simple hypothetical question. Assume that we changed the law and that all abortions were illegal. Under that scenario, how would you punish women who committed “murder” by having abortions?”
What do you get when you combine a camcorder, a simple question and a group of fervent anti-abortionists? You get a fascinating set of answers.
Where are all of the unflinching statements that the women who have abortions have thus committed murder and that they should all be punished as murderers? There were no such answers.
Why all the hedging and squirming? Is it possible that abortion is not really the equivalent of murder? Even in the hearts and minds of those who claim to know for certain that it is “murder”? Assuming that abortion were made illegal, why are so many anti-abortionists so willing to allow a bunch of female murderers walk free without without being penalized under the law? Especially when those who committed the “murder” killed “babies,” allegedly with deliberation and premeditation?
This January 2008 video was produced by At Center Network, “a project of the Northbrook Peace Committee, Inc., a group that works for justice and nonviolent resolution of conflicts.”
Rabel,
“First of all, they do not want their dollars (meaning money they earned, not given) going to Planned Parenthood internationally.”
To make this abundantly clear, the Government spends substantially less money on safe sex education (and most certainly abortions) then it spends on abstinence only education. The Bush administration placed over 270 million dollars into it. So no need to fret. Abortion is drastically underfunded and you should worry more about those million dollar sports stadiums sucking up your money.
Just keeping the facts straight.
The only problem with my arguement is that if not baby (fetus, for all you evolutionist)tissue is not available, then it would be difficult to punish the man.
Prochoice crowd like yourself, always find minute cases where a woman’s life is endangered, but according to a most popular doctor(delivered over 1,000 babies), an abortion was never needed in protection of the mother. What about birthing the baby for adoption!!!!
And no Alison, the woman can have all the sex in the world, but she will have no offspring. Remember the question.
Women want a bailout of the responsibilities, with no help from “neutered men” of America…meaning men have given up the fight and responsibilities for what is right and good.
Rabel.
Karl:
How would it do that?
Are you stating that via the existence of a child, the irresponsible sire and dam suddenly become a caring, loving, supportive father and mother? Are you implying that the community will force them to mature? Are you simply stating that the evidence of a birth will prove that someone had irresponsible sex?
In reverse order:
The last (denoting a living human being as a immorality marker for another pair) is reprehensible.
The middle (community enforcement of maturity) requires tools that we’ve deliberately dismantled because they were repeatedly misused. They worked better for oppression of difference than they did for enhancement of maturity in any case, since all one had to do to remain immature was mouth the platitudes and keep the immaturity in private. With the hypothetical baby.
The first (magical transformation of parents at birth)… All I can say is that I’m a pro-life theist and even I don’t believe that much unreality is going to intrude on our shared reality any time soon. I certainly don’t want to base laws on the presumption that it will happen every time.
As for the list of requirements, I applaud you. As Mark said, I might tweak and fiddle, but the proposals as a whole were pretty solid. Well done.
Abortion is nothing more than the bailouts on wallstreet. People do not own up and live up to their mistakes and dumb CHOICES.
Maybe, “Mark the Great” and “Grumpy the Intellectual” would agree to pithing the brain thru the orbitals. That’s what kind of society we have now, a bunch of drugged zombies doing what makes them feel good.
Why am I singled out for applying a medical solution? Am I too harsh?
Then why does it not seem so harsh to thrash and cut and pith a baby who is viable? Does anyone of you see the brutality of abortion or are your senses and morals medicated beyond reason? Maybe apathy?
How sad you all are. Really.
Rabel.
Rabel,
You want sad and tragic you should read a little history about the back alley butchers and the victims of economics and the law back before the establishment of Planned Parenthood, when it was a felony to even mail INFORMATION about sex and contraception. When you see the lives of women who had no control at all over their situations who, because hubby demanded a little nookie (and could divorce her if she refused) found herself pregnant with number 6 or 7 or 8 and she couldn’t feed the ones she already had, they were driven out of desperation to coat hanger abortionists and often died…don’t sell us the tragedy of an unformed, personality-less mass of cells until you understand the tragedy of women’s history as victim of men’s (non) control.
You must ask yourself, if you were a woman, who would you want telling you what you could do with your body.
As far as zombie’s go, I’ve never seen one so virulent as those who are so steeped in fanaticism that they can’t see outside their own little ideological box, and are willing to kill anyone who threatens to open that box so they might finally be able to see.