Penalty for getting an abortion

[Ebowed]

It is clear that the main reason pro-lifers pushed the Partial Birth Abortion Ban was to chip away at abortion rights in general.

Of course

[nclib]

Are you being serious? If not, my point was that the pro-lifers wouldn't have intentionally made the language vague if all they wanted was to ban a specific type of abortion.

[Ebowed]

Are you being serious? If not, my point was that the pro-lifers wouldn't have intentionally made the language vague if all they wanted was to ban a specific type of abortion.

Yes, I was being serious.

The Partial Birth Abortion ban was a load of crap anyway.  Why is one type of abortion somehow worse than another?  Sure, PBA is more gruesome, but the fetus gets killed no matter the type of abortion.

[Speed of Sound]

3rd Trimester abortions should first time be a hefty fine, and second time be jail time of up to 5, third time you tie her tubes.

[nclib]

Yes, I was being serious.

My apologies. I wasn't sure because a lot of people see partial birth abortions as being very different from early term abortions.

[J. J.]

Do you honestly believe that happens that often? If a woman wanted an abortion, why would she wait until she was 8 1/2 months pregnant?

There are people on the pro choice side who favor that and object to any regulation.  Granted, there are people on the pro-life side who feel that preventing fertilization should be a criminal act, or that abortion should even be illegal if the mother's life is in danger.

I think this is a very complex issue and attempting to state a position without a lot of qualifications is wrong.

Actually, in answer to your question, ardent pro-lifers would say that the woman might be too embarrassed to get one before that time.  People are out there making these arguments.

My point was that since unjustified late-term abortions are so rare, banning them would result in banning abortions done for health reasons.

It is clear that the main reason pro-lifers pushed the Partial Birth Abortion Ban was to chip away at abortion rights in general.

Friday, I heard a woman (on CNN), speaking against a late term abortion ban as giving the reason as being, "A woman might want a late term abortion."  That reasoning, which I would expect is not yours, is by no means a retraction of Roe v. Wade, but a rather solid expansion of it.  Conversely, South Dakota makes a retraction of Roe v. Wade.

Now, with a few exceptions, many pro-life people would look at a situation where a woman was kidnapped, raped and held until the 8 1/2 month of her pregnancy differently than they would at a woman deciding that she didn't like how her close fit in the 8 1/2 month.  So would many pro-choice people.

Extremist, on both sides, do not make those distinctions.

Nclib, I'll ask you, do you feel that an 8 1/2 month pregnancy should be terminated for any reason?  If you are asking me, I would not oppose it in some cases.

[Cubby]

I'm against abortion for the same reasons I'm against the death penalty.

I voted jail time.

Hand in your LGBT card now please.

Abortion should be legal in the first trimester. After that legal only with doctor's consent or if it was rape, etc. Women aren't baby producing machines they have a right to control their destiny.

[afleitch]

I do find it disturbing that people would wish that a woman who has an abortion is jailed. What about any other children she has, what happens to them when you haul their mother away from them? What happens if they don't have other family members to take them in? You would be breaking up the family.

In jailing the mother you are also punishing the husband or partner or her children. She would also be out of work if she was imprisoned and would find it hard to find work if she was released. You are hurting the family income, it's wellbeing and integrity.

[dazzleman]

Abortion is such a nasty issue, and this is one of the reasons why.  If it is not legal in all cases, even if it is legal in most cases, but has a few restrictions, any restrictive law must carry penalties for its violation.

Should it be like prostitution, and carry a meaningless, and ineffective, fine?  Does it do more harm than good to put a woman having a prohibited abortion in prison?

I confess that I don't know the answers to these questions.  I am not a fan of unrestricted abortion.  I favor more responsible use of birth control, and failing that, putting unwanted children up for adoption.  Right now, there is a shortage of newborn babies of American origin available for adoption.

There is no perfect solution, but let's be honest and recognize that this is a problem created by people's irresponsible behavior; it's not an unavoidable natural disaster that just befall us for no reason.

I favor looking at the whole issue rather than focus on narrow parts of it from a 'rights' perspective.

[opebo]

Should it be like prostitution, and carry a meaningless, and ineffective, fine? 

Actually I believe that in most localities prostitution is punished much more harshly than that.  Several months of jail time at the very least are the norm, and I think that one can get into years of jail time at the third offense. 

For 'johns' in some venues punishments are just fines, but in other localities I have been informed that several offenses can put one into a felony category.  On the whole punishment of prostitution in the US is shockingly harsh.

[Smash255]

Should be legal.

^^^^^

[nclib]

Nclib, I'll ask you, do you feel that an 8 1/2 month pregnancy should be terminated for any reason?

Getting an abortion when one is 8 1/2 months is not always justifiable. But a woman and her doctor should be the ones to determine what is justifiable and what is not, not the federal or state government.

[Ebowed]

I do find it disturbing that people would wish that a woman who has an abortion is jailed. What about any other children she has, what happens to them when you haul their mother away from them? What happens if they don't have other family members to take them in? You would be breaking up the family.

In jailing the mother you are also punishing the husband or partner or her children. She would also be out of work if she was imprisoned and would find it hard to find work if she was released. You are hurting the family income, it's wellbeing and integrity.

You question how any pro-lifer could support jailing a woman who has an illegal abortion, because it could break up a family.  Well, let's apply the same logic to a woman convicted of murdering a friend over a petty argument.  Gee, what a bitch, right?  Haul her ass off to jail as soon as possible, lest we allow a cold-blooded murderer to roam the streets!

But this woman, who is convicted of murder, has a family.  A healthy, functional family; a loving husband who says that the murder was a mere accident after a battle of quick tempers, two adorable children whose nurture will be shattered for the rest of their childhood if you send the woman to jail.

How heartless and disturbing.  Sending a woman to jail because she was convicted of a crime - when she has a family!

Think about this issue logically, and try to see it from a pro-life perspective.  Someone who is pro-life has come to the conclusion that an abortion is the murder of an innocent human being.  Why, in God's name, would any pro-life person then oppose jailing a woman who consents to this act?  Do you expect pro-life people to come out in favor of fines as the only punishment for every other type of murder?  Of course not; such an argument is completely ridiculous.

[Ebowed]

Nclib, I'll ask you, do you feel that an 8 1/2 month pregnancy should be terminated for any reason?

Getting an abortion when one is 8 1/2 months is not always justifiable. But a woman and her doctor should be the ones to determine what is justifiable and what is not, not the federal or state government.

Well, what would be a justifiable reason to perform the abortion, in your opinion?

[afleitch]

Your argument - that jailing women who have abortions might break up families - is one of the worst thought-out, craziest arguments against anti-abortion laws I have ever seen, and I question how you can honestly believe it.

Because I am Pro-Choice and I am entitled to my beliefs. I support first tri-mester abortions under the written consent of two doctors. It does not mean I have a twisted or warped morality. I care about 'quality of life' issues to.

Let me put it to you this way:

If you had a sister, who was suffering mental anguish after falling pregnant, perhaps at the hands of someone she did not know, would you demand she was imprisoned regardless of her mental state if she say, decided to have an abortion 2 weeks into her pregnancy?

[Ebowed]

Because I am Pro-Choice and I am entitled to my beliefs. I support first tri-mester abortions under the written consent of two doctors. It does not mean I have a twisted or warped morality. I care about 'quality of life' issues to.

Let me put it to you this way:

If you had a sister, who was suffering mental anguish after falling pregnant, perhaps at the hands of someone she did not know, would you demand she was imprisoned regardless of her mental state if she say, decided to have an abortion 2 weeks into her pregnancy?

I never said you weren't entitled to your beliefs.  I just questioned the validity of what I view as a horrendously bad argument against the pro-life cause - and you didn't respond to it.

As for your loaded question, of course she should be jailed.  Nobody is above the law, although you do remind me of the person who asked Mike Dukakis if he would support the death penalty for a man convicted of raping his wife.  He responded with an almost-mechanical denounciation of capital punishment - a freedom fighter, indeed.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The law that passed South Dakota should be known as the Rapist Breeding Rights law. Rapists who want to have lots of children will flock to South Dakota.

[Ebowed]

The law that passed South Dakota should be known as the Rapist Breeding Rights law.

FWIW, I think Massachusetts enacted a similar total ban on abortion, but before Roe v Wade.

[afleitch]

As for your loaded question, of course she should be jailed.

It was a loaded question I admit, but that was it's purpose. However in regular murder cases, the mental state of the perpetrator is often taken into account before sentencing often resulting in either leaner punishments, geing commited to an institution for a period of time, or ocassionaly, aquitted. Would that same due process be allowed for the unborn or is it jail no matter what?

[Ebowed]

As for your loaded question, of course she should be jailed.

It was a loaded question I admit, but that was it's purpose. However in regular murder cases, the mental state of the perpetrator is often taken into account before sentencing often resulting in either leaner punishments, geing commited to an institution for a period of time, or ocassionaly, aquitted. Would that same due process be allowed for the unborn or is it jail no matter what?

First of all, where is your response to my points on your original argument, that jailing women who have abortions could break up families?

Of course I'm not opposed to due process of law - indeed, the mental state of the person would have to be taken into account.  In your question you didn't specify why exactly this certain sister of mine is in a state of mental anguish - one clue was that the pregnancy might have been at the hands of someone she didn't know.  Does this mean she was sleeping around while drunk at a party, or what?  If she's experiencing "mental anguish," how is that going to translate into a sound, legal way of deciding how tough the punishment should be?  I'm sure many women would suffer mental trauma at the fact that they are pregnant and wish to rid themselves of the kid before it becomes viable.  But you don't let regular murder cases slide over "mental anguish" - lessen the penalty?  Maybe; depends on the exact circumstances.  That said, I'm no legal scholar, but I certainly don't believe in letting the criminal go easy because they're family.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The law that passed South Dakota should be known as the Rapist Breeding Rights law.

FWIW, I think Massachusetts enacted a similar total ban on abortion, but before Roe v Wade.

Dumb puritan traditions. They finally allowed the sale of alcohol on Sunday a couple of years ago.

[Alcon]

The law that passed South Dakota should be known as the Rapist Breeding Rights law.

FWIW, I think Massachusetts enacted a similar total ban on abortion, but before Roe v Wade.

Dumb puritan traditions. They finally allowed the sale of alcohol on Sunday a couple of years ago.

It's all about Catholicism, not "puritan traditions."  No one in Massachusetts went, "hmm, what would my great-great-great granfather have voted on this?"

[afleitch]

Well mental 'anguish' is often very difficult to discern as to what effect it had and is based on sometimes intrusive physchological tests. But like yourself I'm not a legal scholar nor physchologist all I was doing was tossing that example in the air.

As for the issue of family, again it comes down to personal definition. I do not believe that a woman who has abortion is on the same scale as a woman who commits a murder or even a petty crime, for to me it is not a crime. A woman who commits murder would be a danger to her family and to her society and so should be jailed as a result. However a woman having an abortion does not pose a danger to her family. If she has an abortion she is no more likely to grab a gun and go on rampage as a woman who has not had an abortion. Therefore imprisoning women who have an abortion is wrong and detrimental to the wellbeing of her family.

I know that you will disagree and thats fine, but my argument to me and to my beliefs on abortion and would not make sense to someone who believes that abortion is murder. I used to be a member of a pro-life group when in school. However as I grew up I questioned the group and it's members who seemed to be hell bent on competing for the 'I'm more pro-life than you' title. Their ways of arguing were not as well thought out as your own for example.

I moved, through thought and debate and discussion towards my current position, which is far less extreme than many pro-choice supporters on this forum. I do not go in for 'absolutism' on any side. In the UK I actually support the tightening of restrictions by several weeks based on advances in understanding and in an increase in premature birth survival and I am open to even more restrictions as they are proposed, discussed and debated in a proper manner.

[Ebowed]

As for the issue of family, again it comes down to personal definition. I do not believe that a woman who has abortion is on the same scale as a woman who commits a murder or even a petty crime, for to me it is not a crime. A woman who commits murder would be a danger to her family and to her society and so should be jailed as a result. However a woman having an abortion does not pose a danger to her family. If she has an abortion she is no more likely to grab a gun and go on rampage as a woman who has not had an abortion. Therefore imprisoning women who have an abortion is wrong and detrimental to the wellbeing of her family.

Now, remember, from the pro-life perspective, abortion is murder.  Whether a woman who has an abortion will be any less of a mother depends largely on the reason she had the abortion.  It could be for selfish reasons, or it could be to hide adultery, or any other unsound reason.  To suggest that imprisoning women who have an abortion - which, under the poll's circumstances, is a crime (unless you went for the final option) - is "wrong" is like saying that punishing crimes at all is wrong.  Does it hurt the family?  No more than imprisoning a son convicted of snorting cocaine, or sending a father to jail after he molests one of his children's friends.  Criminal justice isn't pretty, but it's not meant to be.

I know that you will disagree and thats fine, but my argument to me and to my beliefs on abortion and would not make sense to someone who believes that abortion is murder. I used to be a member of a pro-life group when in school. However as I grew up I questioned the group and it's members who seemed to be hell bent on competing for the 'I'm more pro-life than you' title. Their ways of arguing were not as well thought out as your own for example.

Well, thanks for the compliment.  I must say that I've never had a change in my beliefs regarding the abortion issue, and while this may seem stubborn at first, my position has lasted since I have been able to form a political opinion, and the same can't be said of too many political issues, so that's saying a bit.  That said, I'd love to be pro-choice.  I think it's a convenient answer to a very messy problem, at least for the women who choose to do it.  But it is clear to me that an abortion ends a human life - with more than 30% of my generation having been aborted, I am of the opinion that the right to life of any unborn fetus fully and absolutely trumps a woman's right to make decisions about something that, while it occurs in her body, also involves a separate being who, if given the chance to live, will not be staying in the woman's body much longer.  Nine months of pain and sickness involved with an unwanted pregnancy is inconvenient, but it is a short term problem and if removed, the long term advantage of a new human life being introduced to the world is lost.

A good thread on this subject was created by Akno21 nearly a year ago.  He remains pro-choice, but his original question is good food for thought.

I really want to be Pro-Choice, but...

a few factors make me unsure.

The first one is that in virtually every case

If the abortion does not occur, the fetus will be born like a nomal child and leave the womb, become a living, breathing, human being.

While I don't agree neccessarily that you are killing the baby on the spot, aren't you preventing it from being born, and stopping life from occuring?

[Alcon]

One viable, if not strange argument against that Ebowed.

If any event that in the end leads to the creation of a life is murder, then isn't intercourse with protection or - to an extreme end - male masturbation, murder?