I can understand that but am bothered by the seeming paradox of the issue. To me "murder" implies the killing of a person while neither the Constitution nor the courts have recognized the personhood of a fetus. I understand the Roe ruling and while it extends protections to the fetus past the first trimester it still doesn't address the issue of personhood. I don't begrudge states making the charges harsher for assaulting a pregnant woman but philosophically I have a hard time reconciling that with double murder.
To avoid enforced gestation I'm sure that some form of mandatory sterilization program could significantly reduce unwanted pregnancies. We could start with those who have criminal records or at least the poor and the children of the poor. We could then move on to those whose moral turpitude is less than admirable. Who else? [This is not meant to be serious, but if we criminalize abortion, we have to consider the enforcement, and the proponents of criminalization do not wish to address the ramifications.]
i'm not for new legislation on this...i'm not here as a proponent of that. but there ARE restrictions on abortion in this country that vary from state to state....and the women are not the ones prosecuted....the doctors are. i've not seen even the hardest of the hard-core pro-lifers suggest we throw women in jail for having had an abortion. state may enact laws that prohibit abortions of fetuses that are in the 2nd trimester on through the 3rd without a valid health reason otherwise. that's the state of the law under Roe.
I understand and am in agreement with your positions as stated and am content with current law. However, if abortion becomes illegal (on the scale that some advocate), we are looking at a whole other situation. With some major legal ramifications.
The question of a woman's right to personal autonomy has to be resolved first. If she does have that right, the question of whether the fetus is a person becomes irrelevant. If she doesn't, we're in trouble because there is no good answer to that question. Wait, my argument that women should have the right to autonomy over her own body is "utter fail" because it doesn't happen to conform to the legal status quo? Does that mean that all pro-life arguments are dead on arrival for the same reason?
I will assume that this back-hand is aimed at me since I'm the only one who has been asked this. I haven't really thought that much about it, so I've not been prepared to suggest something... except the playful suggestion of a sentence that equals the length of gestation. We can "criminalize" it (such a potent word) and slap 'em with a $25 fine and community service in a daycare. That will either cure them of wanting babies or make them want a baby. Is that mean enough? Apparently that is more than is done now.
So are you suggesting the United States should have more liberal laws on abortion than currently exist? I called it utter fail because it exceeds the scope of Roe. I'm assuming from all the "let's all find ways to reduce abortion" comments that keep floating around that most people who identify themselves as pro-choice aren't dissatisfied with the state of the law regarding abortion in the US. In fact, it's been said over and over again to giddyup that he just needs to accept the current state of the law and move on...that his cause is lost. Under Roe a woman only has an absolute right to autononmy if she chooses to have an abortion in the first trimester....beyond that, she has limited autonomy. Am I to understand that you and others are DISSATISFIED with the state of the law regarding abortion in the US because it doesn't go far enough to protect a woman's autonomy over her body?? Are any of you actively involved in seeking to affect legislation or policy in EXPANDING abortion rights for women beyond those set by the Supreme Court??? In all honesty, this is completely new to me. I've been discussing this issue here and elsewhere for a very long time....and this is the first time I've seen someone suggest that the state of the law regarding abortiion in the US is not permissive enough for women.
I can think just off the top of my head (at 6 am in the morning ) of 3 diffferent laws that would most likely reduce abortions without any ban whatsoever and each could provide remedy solely to women... 1. States could pass a law that allows women to file and recieve immediate child support at conception. 2. States could pass stronger laws that allows women to file suits against abortionists and clinics for causing emotional, mental or physical damage by the abortion procedure. 3. States could pass a law that would criminalize the boy/man for an unwanted pregnancy. After all if the woman is a victim of an unwanted pregnancy you don't need to give the baby the death penalty, hold the man responsible for victimizing the woman. None of these are bans or laws directly against the abortion procedure. But with greatly increased education efforts for teens, parents etc etc along with more responsibility for the use of contraceptives would go along way in changing the behaviors of the men who are responsible for an unwanted pregnancy. Before you attack these ideas, realize I am not saying to do it in a vacuum. For instance if we start with education have a law go in affect in a 2-3 year time frame... On point #1- If boys/men had a clear responsibility for child support at conception and this had to be filed by the impregnated mother then a simple filing along with a DNA test could establish responsibility. At this point the state could file orders to deduct child support from wages. Once the fetus is aborted the child support would end. States already have programs and remedies for failure to pay child support. This isn't perfect, but it would help with the goal of proper responsibility, support women, and give men a very good reason to use a contraceptive effectively. On point #2- It is just not right for women to be damaged by the procedure. If there are abortions it should be strongly guaranteed they are safe. We need stronger laws that ensure this and get more of the greedy abortion mills to shape up. On point #3- If a woman had the choice to file charges against a boy/man for an unwanted pregnancy that resulted in her getting an abortion this would bring a huge wake up call to the world of using contraceptive responsibily. It is astounding that men are skating free on the issue of an unwanted pregnancy, Pro Choice is adament that pregnancy is a woman's choice and yet the only penalty for a man violating this choice is killing the fetus. There should be a big step up on education, contraceptives etc and a criminal law remedy for women to have to protect them from predatory men who impregnate them against there will to carry a fetus. Most men will really buck that last idea, but these are the kind of ideas that at least should be on the table that would help in the effort to reduce abortions without criminalizing women and banning the procedure. I really believe this kind of thinking which lays a more just responsibilty on society would really get this issue going the right direction. Again, before we throw this off the table in a hissy fit, let's bring these kind of ideas to the table along with the efforts to educate and change behaviors.
you're creating a strawman. you're building up an opponent in an argument to be something it's not so you can knock it down. it's more complex than that, and you know it. this after telling the other side that the thing they're seeking to protect is irrelvant to the discussion.
It's a very enlightening question. If pro-choice advocates are so gun-ho about labeling an abortion murder, then why not follow the conviction through to it's logical conclusion and charge the mother with murder? Why shy away from that?
I wouldn't rule it suicide. I told my wife this morning about the thread, her only comment was something I can't repeat and a story about our labrador retriever. she said I forgot she took our lab to the vet 4 months ago because a stray dog impregnated her and the vet told her he couldn't legally terminate the pregnancy and the puppies would have to be given up for adoption. so my detemined wife went to the SPCA, same answer... so she asked our dog if she wanted the pregnancy and the lab just frowned My wife told me dang if my dog should have to carry those puppies...BTW she gave birth to 11 read my post above, I do not favor a ban on abortion as the starting point
Because the mother does not kill the fetus. Why would you criminalize the mother when they don't terminate the life? Ridiculous
which pro-life advocates here are gung-ho about labeling abortion murder??? i asked you when i said it and you responded that others "alluded" to it. is it that it's been alluded to or that a group of people here have been gung ho about it? you can pick up a corn cob pipe at a dollar store for the straw man you're building
Wait a minute A woman is not responsible for terminating the life, but she is responsible for carrying it to term?
The issue is not a 'strawman' issue, I think that has been pointed out. Women don't deliberately get pregnant TO have an abortion. You are suggesting that I view women as murderers, getting pregnant with the intent to kill. I am saying that I understand the duress and trauma that an unwanted pregnancy brings to a woman and I also realize that it is the abortionist/doctor that makes the unltimate decision to terminate the fetus. I don't hold a woman as an accompliss because they are convinced that it is simple birth control. Is a woman responsible to carry a fetus to term and give birth to a live baby? What a question to ask a pastor. I can't believe you want to make this issue so hard there is no room for discussion or efforts to reduce abortions. Of course I would like every baby to be born, to have loving parents and to enjoy a wonderful life... I realize we have to live in reality and understand that love accepts situations that are unpleasant and works to help others I have never ever even thought like you are suggesting that a women should be forced to give birth. But I can tell you this I have talked probably 10 or more women into not getting an abortion, I have been thanked repeatedly for it and never had one come back with a single regret... and it wasn't that hard to get them to change their mind and find them the support.. I have ladies in our church in that very place sorry if that offends you I have also respected the choice women have made to have an abortion and supported them greatly after the procedure... my only sister for example - twice
It is not a "child" to the woman in question and you have no right to say that her choice to have sex removes her choices in other areas.
For one, you cannot say that definitively in all cases and for two, isn't that a coping mechanism to make the "choice" easier? Does that make it the right thing to do?
