Pro-lifers: What would you do if you were in charge?

[Blalron]

Pretend that a constitutional amendment allows abortion to be outlawed. A pro-life congress and president are fully in charge. You are on the commitee to draft the new rules.

What kind of penalties would you put into place for:

(1) Doctors who carry out abortions

(2) Women who receive abortions from those doctors

(3) Women who induce abortion without any outside help.

(4) Pregnant women who leave the country with the intent of getting an abortion.

(5) People who assist women in getting an abortion, such as taking them to a doctor that would illegally give her one.

(6) What are the penalties for possessing abortion causing drugs? For selling? Manufacturing?

(7) What about conspiracy to commit abortion?

(8) Reckless behavior that causes a fetus to be miscarried?

(9) Third trimester abortions versus abortions done in the first or second. Would the penalty be the same or different?

(10) What about accessories to abortion? What kind of penalty would a nurse face that was present during an illegal abortion? She didn't actually carry it out, but is there to help if something goes wrong. Obviously, she is failing to report the illegal activity and is playing a part in it.

(11) Would repeat offenders get harsher penalties?

(12) Would there be exceptions for rape? If so how can a woman effectively prove that she was raped, like she was passed out drunk one night and wasn't aware of the violation until she realized she was pregnant, at which time all physical evidence that the rape occurred has disappeared?

(13) What if the mother's life is in danger?

(14) What about her health? How serious does the health risk have to be before she can get an abortion?

What the health exception include mental health? If she has a history of serious post partum depression and would be in serious mental anguish if she were to give birth again, would abortion be allowed?

You don't have to say that a certain activity gets exactly X number of years, but I want a range. For example, say "Doing this gets you between 1 years and 5 years, at the judges discretion."

[Susanann]

Abortion is murder, the penalties should be the same regardless of the age of the vicitim. As far as leaving the country, those people get off scott free, as they do for any other crime which is a crime here, but not there. Those who "assist" in murder(doctors, nurses, receptionists, owners of the clinic, parents, boyfriends, etc), should get the same penalties as those who assist in any other murder - the death penalty or life in prison.

I definitely prefer execution, because the cost of imprisoning 30 million baby murderers for life, would be in the trillions of dollars. Perhaps many states who dont have the death penalty, would change and reinstate the death penalty under the staggering costs of imprisoning so many doctors, nurses, and women.

I see no exceptions for those who were raped, or who's life is in danger(except in those cases where the child will surely die anyway - very very rare(and in those cases, a governors pardon is in order).

[Blalron]

As far as leaving the country, those people get off scott free, as they do for any other crime which is a crime here, but not there.

Not neccesarily the case. For example, there is a federal law preventing people from leaving the country with the intent to have sex with a minor under the age of 16.

The actual act of having sex with a 15 year old in Thailand is not illegal. However, leaving the country with the intent of doing so is a federal crime.

[Conflict of Interest]

Susanann's way of saying it may be a little harsh. But assuming they were made illegal by that type of administration then you would also have to assume the the penalties would be equally harsh.

And since pro-life philosophy is that abortion is killing, then the people who committed or assisted with the crime would face long jail terms or even death.

I would think that in cases of rape and if the life of the mother is threatened then its not an elective abortion so it could be made legal.

As far as your last statement, I don't think that should be allowed. If a person knows that they should not get pregnant again and does anyway, then they are responsible for their own actions. And should be held to same "sanity" standard that all others who commit crimes are held to.

[emacknight]

Originally posted by Conflict of Interest
As far as your last statement, I don't think that should be allowed. If a person knows that they should not get pregnant again and does anyway, then they are responsible for their own actions. And should be held to same "sanity" standard that all others who commit crimes are held to.

Is a miscarriage. going to count as manslaughter?

If a woman had a miscarriage before, should she be allowed to ever try again? If she knows that her actions are going to lead to the death of her fetus, would that not be gross negligence causing death? In this case does the father go to jail with her?

[Conflict of Interest]

Originally posted by emacknight
Is a miscarriage. going to count as manslaughter?

If a woman had a miscarriage before, should she be allowed to ever try again? If she knows that her actions are going to lead to the death of her fetus, would that not be gross negligence causing death? In this case does the father go to jail with her?

She is not the one inducing the abortion. That's why they are called spontaneous abortions. So no, she didn't do anything wrong nor is it wrong to try again. A pregnancy aborts on it's own for many reasons. Usually because it wasn't viable.

Now if she or someone else caused her to miscarry on purpose then yes she or whomever caused it would then be held accountable for the act. In fact in many states that is already the law.

[FudgeNugget]

Originally posted by Susanann
Abortion is murder, the penalties should be the same regardless of the age of the vicitim. As far as leaving the country, those people get off scott free, as they do for any other crime which is a crime here, but not there. Those who "assist" in murder(doctors, nurses, receptionists, owners of the clinic, parents, boyfriends, etc), should get the same penalties as those who assist in any other murder - the death penalty or life in prison.

I definitely prefer execution, because the cost of imprisoning 30 million baby murderers for life, would be in the trillions of dollars. Perhaps many states who dont have the death penalty, would change and reinstate the death penalty under the staggering costs of imprisoning so many doctors, nurses, and women.

I see no exceptions for those who were raped, or who's life is in danger(except in those cases where the child will surely die anyway - very very rare(and in those cases, a governors pardon is in order).

You would allow a woman who had no intention of having and taking care of a child, to do so, after getting raped? Why?

[FudgeNugget]

Originally posted by Blalron
Not neccesarily the case. For example, there is a federal law preventing people from leaving the country with the intent to have sex with a minor under the age of 16.

The actual act of having sex with a 15 year old in Thailand is not illegal. However, leaving the country with the intent of doing so is a federal crime.

How would the US enforce those laws?

[Conflict of Interest]

Originally posted by FudgeNugget
How would the US enforce those laws?

Well in the case stated they can arrest the person upon re-enty into the US. But only if they know and can somehow prove that a crime was committed. I think it would be rather hard though myself.

[Thudlow Boink]

Originally posted by FudgeNugget
You would allow a woman who had no intention of having and taking care of a child, to do so, after getting raped? Why?

If you accept the premise that abortion is murder, then it's still murder no matter the circumstances under which the baby was conceived. If the fetus is to be considered a human being, with a right to life, then to be logically consistent you can't deny it that right, before birth or after, because it was conceived during a rape. Conversely, if the traumatic effects on the mother of bearing a child that was the result of rape are allowed to trump the fetus's right to life in this case, why wouldn't considerations of effects on the mother and her rights allow abortions in other cases?

Less central, but also worth considering: if rape were the only legal excuse for an abortion, wouldn't the number of false accusations of rape greatly increase?


The OP contains some good questions, which I won't even try to answer because I'm not among the pro-lifers they're addressed to. Both abortion itself, and the outlawing/punishing of it, give me the creeps when I seriously consider the implications.

[FudgeNugget]

Originally posted by Conflict of Interest
Well in the case stated they can arrest the person upon re-enty into the US. But only if they know and can somehow prove that a crime was committed. I think it would be rather hard though myself.

How would they know? Is an FBI agent going to follow you around Thailand making sure you don't pick up 15 year olds?

Not saying I'm planning on committing it, but how are laws like that enforced?

[Blalron]

If a woman had a miscarriage before, should she be allowed to ever try again? If she knows that her actions are going to lead to the death of her fetus, would that not be gross negligence causing death? In this case does the father go to jail with her?

This is actually a good question. What about women who know that they are prone to miscarriages? My late grandmother went through numerous miscarriages before she had my father and my aunt. If she knew that her actions were extremly likely to result in dead fetusus, isn't that reckless endangerment of human life?

[FudgeNugget]

Originally posted by Thudlow Boink
If you accept the premise that abortion is murder, then it's still murder no matter the circumstances under which the baby was conceived. If the fetus is to be considered a human being, with a right to life, then to be logically consistent you can't deny it that right, before birth or after, because it was conceived during a rape. Conversely, if the traumatic effects on the mother of bearing a child that was the result of rape are allowed to trump the fetus's right to life in this case, why wouldn't considerations of effects on the mother and her rights allow abortions in other cases?

What would happen to the child if the mother was a victim of rape? Would that the mother be forced to take care of a child that she didn't want and isn't able to take care of? Or do all childs like this go to orphanages?

Less central, but also worth considering: if rape were the only legal excuse for an abortion, wouldn't the number of false accusations of rape greatly increase?

True.

The OP contains some good questions, which I won't even try to answer because I'm not among the pro-lifers they're addressed to. Both abortion itself, and the outlawing/punishing of it, give me the creeps when I seriously consider the implications.

[Conflict of Interest]

Originally posted by FudgeNugget
How would they know? Is an FBI agent going to follow you around Thailand making sure you don't pick up 15 year olds?

Not saying I'm planning on committing it, but how are laws like that enforced?

That was my point too. I have no idea how they would. However, if the parents of the 15 year old said you took her without their permission they may be able to do something there. But after the fact, unless she is pregnant how do they know whether you had sex with her or not.

[Blalron]

Well, maybe they could use credit card records that said you spend $500 at the Thai Underage Sex House. That might work.

[Payton's Servant]

Originally posted by Susanann
Those who "assist" in murder(doctors, nurses, receptionists, owners of the clinic, parents, boyfriends, etc), should get the same penalties as those who assist in any other murder - the death penalty or life in prison.

I definitely prefer execution, because the cost of imprisoning 30 million baby murderers for life, would be in the trillions of dollars. Perhaps many states who dont have the death penalty, would change and reinstate the death penalty under the staggering costs of imprisoning so many doctors, nurses, and women.

So let me see if I've got this straight:

1) You favor the executing, ie, murder for those who have abortions and those who assist in having abortions.

2) But you say you're "pro-life."

Don't even try and tell me that you can't see the huge hypocracy there.

[Conflict of Interest]

Originally posted by Payton's Servant
So let me see if I've got this straight:

1) You favor the executing, ie, murder for those who have abortions and those who assist in having abortions.

2) But you say you're "pro-life."

Don't even try and tell me that you can't see the huge hypocracy there.

Actually, I don't. It sounds like you equate execution with murder. I do not. An execution is a penalty extracted by society upon someone that has done very severe acts such as killing somone else in a premeditated fashion.

If, and this is the crux of the whole thread, the "pro-life congress and president" deemed it murder to have or assist with an abortion, then to do so would be premeditated murder. And if the laws governing punishment of those acts is execution then this would be a just punishment in the eyes of the law. And even society as a whole because they are the ones that knowingly placed the president and congress into power.

Look at what the thread is all about. This has nothing to do with "is execution considered murder".

[Blalron]

I sincerely hope the comment about executing 30 million women was not made seriously.

[emacknight]

Let's assume for now that you would execute women who had abortions, and the doctors that performed that, since they were premeditated. Would you execute someone who was pregnant?

[Blalron]

I'm sure the pro-lifers would wait until the baby was born to execute its mother.

[emacknight]

Is there a presidence now about how to execute a women? From my experience it happens so rarely, but if I was a woman on death row I'd make damn certain I was pregnant as often as I could, how many rights are you willing to violate to make sure this doesn't happen?

[Conflict of Interest]

Originally posted by Blalron
I sincerely hope the comment about executing 30 million women was not made seriously.

Where do you get the 30 million number from Blalron?

[Splanky]

I definitely prefer execution, because the cost of imprisoning 30 million baby murderers for life, would be in the trillions of dollars. Perhaps many states who dont have the death penalty, would change and reinstate the death penalty under the staggering costs of imprisoning so many doctors, nurses, and women.

That's where he got it from. Executing a prisoner probably costs more than imprisoning one, with all the legal costs, anyway.

Execution isn't murder but there is still hypocricy in those calling themselves "pro-life" and yet advocating execution, the taking away of someones life. A more appropriate title would be "anti-abortionists", because "pro-life" is misleading.

[Conflict of Interest]

Thanks Splanky, I missed that. And I have no idea where that person got the 30 mil from.

And I agree, on the surface, that pro-life can be misleading. But no more so than pro-choice. Because pro-choice peoploe are not that way in all things. Just like pro-life people aren't. This name is only used to describe their views on abortion. Nothing more.

Unless you think pro-choice people are for allowing say employers to hire whomever they want, even the less qualified person as long as he was the right "color" or sex. I don't think you would find many pro-choice people that would though.

[Guinastasia]

I see no exceptions for those who were raped, or who's life is in danger(except in those cases where the child will surely die anyway - very very rare(and in those cases, a governors pardon is in order).

Ectopic pregnancies, you mean?
You mean, if a mother's life was in danger, you would not make an acception?

Do you have a site for how "very very rare" these cases are?

[Conflict of Interest]

Actually Guinastasia, they aren't as rare as they used to be. Prior to 1970 they were at about .4% of all pregnancies. Now, according to CDC they occur in about 2% of all pregnancies.

[E-Sabbath]

I kind of like the idea of Susanann getting her way.

Because I think the idea of putting to death thirty million people would certainly end this mess once and for all.

[Palo Verde]

I think very few pro-lifers would agree with Susanann about this.

Most people are far more moderate.

But of course it's the fringe elements that get all the headlines.

[Blalron]

I'm rather disappointed that no pro-lifer has bothered to tackle my list so far. So here, I'll help you out. I'll write out a sample law for number one, just so you can get the general idea of what I am talking about.

1. Abortion in the First Degree.

A person commits the crime of abortion in the first degree when he

(1) intentionally performs a medical, or otherwise physically invasive operation that

(2) brings about the death of a fetus that is being carried by another person

(3) without a valid medical reason

Abortion in the first degree is a felony which shall be punished by a term of imprisonment not less than five years, and not more than ten years, and a fine not to exceed 100,000 dollars.

This section does not apply if the abortion is perfomed by a licensed medical doctor that is performing the abortion for a valid medical reason.

Definitions: For purposes of this statute,

"valid medical reason" means that its done to prevent death or serious and substantial physical harm. Preventing mental harm is not a valid medical reason.

"fetus" means any unborn human from the moment of conception.

[candida]

Damn, damn, damn, damn, damn!

Now, if I'd come up with Susanann's beautiful parody of what ‘the thunderous one', il Topo, ‘the Beaglyone', the lettuce-lover and autz really, really wanted . . . Bob Cos would have interjected ‘ad hominem' and Shodan would have read a few more pages of ‘The Beginner's Guide To Logical Fallacies' and have come up with ‘Strawman'!

Nicely done Susanann, I have to say that.

[Blalron]

Any pro-lifers have any comments on my model law? Do any of you have any proposed laws to draft about this matter?

[Susanann]

Originally posted by Blalron
I sincerely hope the comment about executing 30 million women was not made seriously.

I was totally and completely serious.

If 30 million people choose to murder, then 30 million should be executed. The principle is the same: death penalty for murder (regardless of the number of murderers).

I believe in the death penalty. I am not totally "pro-life", if someone is shooting at me, I will shoot back. I am not a Quaker. I am not against the death penalty for murderers - I am for it.

I am "pro-life" in that I dont believe that any innocent person should be killed/murdered by someone else, regardless of his age, or how he was concieved.

No one chooses how he gets concieved, and I give equal respect and rights to any person, even those who were born/concieved out of wedlock, born of rape, testtube, whatever.

[Guinastasia]

And again, Susanann what would you do in the case of pregnancy that is threatening someone's health and/or life?

[Susanann]

Originally posted by Conflict of Interest
Where do you get the 30 million number from Blalron?

It is a rough estimate/summation of how many woman have had abortions since Roe VS, Wade, plus the doctors, nurses, councilors, facilitators, receptionists, in abortion clinics, etc.

Perhaps I should have said a million executions/death penalties each year for baby murderers.

We get about a million baby murders a year, I dont know how many of those are muliple murderers from prior years.

[Susanann]

Originally posted by Guinastasia
And again, Susanann what would you do in the case of pregnancy that is threatening someone's health and/or life?

If it is a case where either the mother or the baby will surely die, but both cannot live, then the answer is the same as who goes in the life boats when you dont have enough.

If the mother will surely die unless the baby is aborted, but the baby can live with the mother dying, then someone has to choose which lives and which dies - one death will occur regardless of the decision.

I can see where many/most mothers would prefer to die herself in order to save her own child. Should we allow most mothers to choose death? I think this is getting off topic/hijacking to change this discussion into whether we should allow mothers to.... in effect, commit suicide to protect and save their children.

[Susanann]

Originally posted by candida



Nicely done Susanann, I have to say that.

?

[Blalron]

I'm pro-choice, and choice works both ways. If a woman would decide to sacrifice her own life to carry a fetus to term, I wouldn't dream of stopping her. Forcing someone to have an abortion is just as evil as forcing a woman to be pregnant against her will.

[Blalron]

Susanann, I think you are missing out on an extremely important legal concept. Ex post facto, latin for "after the fact" laws are unconstitutional.

For example, they could make eating bannanas illegal, starting today. But they can't put people in jail for eating banannas yesterday, when it wasn't made into crime.

[RickJay]

I think Susanann's idea is absolutely horrible. I'm firmly pro-choice.

But she's one of the few honest and ethically consistent pro-lifers I've ever seen. If you're genuinely pro-life, rape shouldn't be an issue.

[Slindorff]

Originally posted by Conflict of Interest
Look at what the thread is all about. This has nothing to do with "is execution considered murder".

But the whole crux of your argument is that life is sacred and the wilfull taking of life is murder.

[Susanann]

Blalron,

Yeah, you are right, I realized that after I posted, that is why I changed it to say 1 million per year instead of 30 million total after a period of 30 years. The 30 million figure just gives a perspective of the impact after a few decades, assuming that the baby murder rate would continue at the same pace, a weak assumtion at that.

I dont mean to say that we can go back and convict those who have already done it.

I also dont mean to say that if we execute baby murderers that the rate of women killing their babies will continue to be a million a year, it might go down(some might be deterred), and obviously, there will be no repeat offendors once they are executed.

[Susanann]

RickJay,

You are right that rape should not be an issue - the baby had no choice in it, so why should he be put to death?

Duh, yeah, I know it would be terrible for the woman to carry and have a child by rape, but who said there was anything "good" about being raped?

Rape and rape pregnancy can be handled and reduced by other means, self defense, ccw, etc which is another topic.

[Susanann]

Originally posted by RickJay
I think Susanann's idea is absolutely horrible. I'm firmly pro-choice.

1. I agree that it is horrible, but the woman still retains her "choice".

2. I dont think anyone, any normal person, "enjoys" giving the death penalty. I agree, giving the death penalty to murderers is horrible, but it is just.

Much better if people just stop murdering each other - no murder, no death penalty.

Once a law is passed to give the death penalty for murder, it then becomes the choice/decision of the woman and the doctor to be executed or not. The prochoice people still get "some/most" of what they want, since the woman still has the "choice" to abort or not - the only thing that is different is that she will be executed if she chooses to murder. Her decision, not mine.

[Blalron]

Susanann, wouldn't your plan make every woman who miscarries the subject of a homicide investigation?

[Conflict of Interest]

Originally posted by Slindorff
But the whole crux of your argument is that life is sacred and the wilfull taking of life is murder.

Where did I ever say that?

[Blalron]

I am "pro-life" in that I dont believe that any innocent person should be killed/murdered by someone else, regardless of his age, or how he was concieved.

But is the taking of all innocent life murder? I'm sure George W. Bush took some innocent lives by ordering the bombing of Baghdad, but that doesn't make him a murderer, does it? Why not?

[Blalron]

Much better if people just stop murdering each other - no murder, no death penalty.

Let's say a woman has herself cut open and gets a 4 month old fetus taken out of her body, and as an indirect result of that the fetus dies since it can't survive outside the mothers body. The woman hasn't directly killed the fetus, but she caused its death by choosing not to give it any more physical aid.

Is that any different from having a fetus torn limb from limb, or are they both murder cases in your eyes?

[Blalron]

I dont think anyone, any normal person, "enjoys" giving the death penalty. I agree, giving the death penalty to murderers is horrible, but it is just.

Gandhi once said, "An eye for an eye makes the entire world blind"

[Susanann]

Originally posted by Blalron
But is the taking of all innocent life murder? I'm sure George W. Bush took some innocent lives by ordering the bombing of Baghdad, but that doesn't make him a murderer, does it? Why not?

Lets try to stay with the main point of this topic - abortion as is commonly being done right now (not miscarraige, not war, etc.)

[Blalron]

I only mention miscarriage because I believe that if your laws were implemented that equated the killing of a fetus with murder, miscarriages would potentially become criminal investigations into whether the fetus died a wrongful death.