Going with their alleged views on abortion, it should logically be life imprisonment or execution. They’d probably go for stoning, since we’re basically talking theocracy here.
Because fighting for a theocratic, anti-woman society like that is the whole point of the anti-abortion movement.
No; as always they will just leave the country and get an abortion. “The only moral abortion is my abortion”. The people pushing for persecution almost never apply the persecution to themselves.
Irrelevant, since right now the anti-abortion people are pushing for and passing laws that punish women for miscarriages, not even abortion.
If right and wrong were a consideration in this hypothetical future then abortion would still be legal in it. We are beginning with a hypothetical situation where women have been targeted for persecution, and punishments are going to be designed to implement that persecution. Not out of any interest in justice.
I haven’t read the thread but if it was illegal and a woman was found guilty I think the punishment should be that she is forced to raise a robotic baby programed to have all her faults but more exaggerated. Which isn’t much different then what all parents go through under the best circumstances.
I wouldn’t put this all on the woman though. The guy involved would be subject to his own trial and punishment.
If human life begins at conception then a woman who has an abortion should be given exactly the same punishment as a woman who deliberately kills her infant child. She should be given a long prison sentence or executed. If you’re pro-life I don’t see how you can argue otherwise.
As a man, I’ve conceived a couple of abortions. I did not support the decision. In the second case, I tried my best to convince her otherwise. Under the circumstances of the conception, I don’t think most reasonable people would have thought an abortion would be on the table, and I personally never would have expected this outcome.
When I started typing this, I guess I forgot the hypothetical laws changed the whole ballgame.
Would I face vasectomy for not calling the police on my wife? Or what?
Post-viability or for gender selection: sterilization and community service.
Pre-viability: long-term contraceptive implants.
Because of rape: castration for rapist.
Because of incest: sterilization of both.
Because of fetal deformity: community service.
That’s just silly and absurd as claiming that the pro-choice movement is really a conspiracy to decrease the black population by encouraging the abortion of black fetuses. You’d have to explain for example the fact that support for abortion ban is basically identical in terms of gender or the fact that there already are countries which severely restrict abortion (most notably Ireland and Chile) which definately are not theocracies.
Not necessarily. One might view the fetus (at least before a certain stage such as viability) as not equivalent to human life but nonetheless life worth protecting in most circumstances.
The only two individuals advocating anything remotely close to what you claim were Weeping Wyvern and Hector St. Clare, both of whom extensively qualified their statements (which in turn are only like the book in as much they support harsh punishments for abortionists considering they do not support banning education for women, murdering blacks, or deporting Jews) and neither of whom are representative of the pro-life movement (anymore than Der Trihs or the Amazing Atheist is representative of atheism).
Nonsense. The behavior of the pro-choice side is not remotely consistent with that. Meanwhile, the behavior of the anti-choice side is consistent with people who have a drive for theocracy and to harm women; it doesn’t fit that of people who actually care about “the unborn” at all.
:rolleyes: Don’t be ridiculous. Ireland is only one step removed from theocracy, and recently slowly killed a woman by forbidding her an abortion while lecturing her about how Ireland is a Catholic country.
And the fact that so many women are anti abortion doesn’t contradict my claims at all; there’s no such thing as gender loyalty. Women have a long history of persecuting other women, just as men have a long history of persecuting men. And besides, they aren’t going to refrain from getting an abortion themselves if they want one, they’ll only try to deny it to others.
It’s very simple. There are lots of kinds of killing in the world, and even in cases where they’re all unjust and immoral , there can be different degrees of guilt associated with them. There can be lots of cases where the act of killing a person is, objectively, wrong, and where we wouldn’t want to defend what someone did, but we can understand why they did it. War, for example, is full of such tricky moral situations. I think that Harry Truman’s use of the atomic weapons is not really morally defensible, and if America had lost the war he would probably have been hanged for it, but I don’t really think he should have been, given the pressures of the time and the complexities of the issue.
Likewise, abortion is never ‘okay’, except when your health is seriously threatened, and the law should embody that . I don’t think that either the interests of moral expiation, retribution, or crime prevention really justify treating women who have them the same as women who, say , kill their husband to get his life insurance.
Because women in those countries never have profoundly disabled fetuses, pregnancies that threaten their lives, failed birth control or genetic disorders?
Define serious. Because during my first pregnancy I was so sick I couldn’t keep food down for three weeks when I was seven months along. I even lost several pounds. I was only alive because I was on an IV and I was in pain so bad during that time I was getting morphine injections. During the second pregnancy, my bp was so high they were terrified I was going to go into convulsions, get pre-e and die.
Are you going to have a detailed list of punishments for exactly how much a woman’s life must be threatened before she get your express permission to have an abortion based on your code of morals and ethics? How high must her bp be before she can deliver when pre-e is threatened? Are you going to punish women who experience really severe morning sickness? What about those who have miscarriages? Will they be investigated? What about treatment for an ectopic pregnancy? Will doctors be required to provide detailed evidence that the pregnancy was in fact an ectopic and the women is not a lying, evil baby killing bitch?
Since the fetus has a right to life, it presumably has a right to healthy life. So are you going to punish women who don’t take pre-natals? Opt for a C-section? Get an epi? What about women who opt for a home birth even though it may pose risks to the fetus? A woman who misses a few OB appointments? What about women who refuse to breastfeed and opt for formula instead? Will they be punished for potentially baby harm?
How is this all going to be determined? Are you going to set up a committee of men who will sit there and tell women just how seriously ill they have to be to get moral sanction to have an abortion? How many people will be involved in this issue? Will it be composed of people with a medical background? Or just a group of sanctimonious men lecturing the ebil womens?
Yes, as far as a civilized commitment to health care that can prevent unwanted pregnancies and see a difficult one through to a safe delivery can help. But then it is up to the individuals of this hypothetical society to take notice of the well marked paths that lead to abortion and choose a different way if they wish to be considered civilized.
In the Netherlands, among other places, abortion is free-to-the-patient and widely accessible, but rather rare, because of the thoroughly pragmatic family-planning policy I mentioned earlier, and the very frank culture around sexuality that accompanies it. In other words, you’re both right.
I am all for minimizing abortions due to good family planning practices and education, since it’s an invasive procedure and usually not an emotionally happy time for the woman. But ultimately it should never be a medical procedure that has shame or a sense of moral failing attached to it. It is not more civilized to not have an abortion than it is to have one. What makes the society civilized is to have it available, safe and legal and the decision to be between the patient and her doctor and whomever she chooses to consult.
In other words, a society isn’t more civilized because abortion is rare, a more civilized society generally results in lower abortion rate (like the Netherlands), IMHO.
It’s hard to tie the issue to national characteristics because abortion incidence in the US is very much tied to race. The abortion rate among white women in the US, for instance, is lower than that of women in the Netherlands.