Up to third grade is fair, I think.
I really don’t care, since that isn’t going to happen.
Not entirely sure of your point here, but isn’t this extremely rare case more a matter for medical ethicists (sp?) than for basic / core abortion law?
How are cases handled now for terminal patients that are in extreme pain? where does the balance lay between pain alleviation and assisted suicide?
No; it’s what a lot of anti-abortion law and violence involves itself in. When it forbids or restricts third trimester abortions (or kills the doctors willing to perform them) that describes most of the abortions it restricts or makes more dangerous. Third trimester abortions virtually universally involve either major medical problems with the mother, or fatal problems with the fetus.
She should be forced to become a breeder–held in a house, suffered repeated rapes until she is pregnant, forced to carry to term and give birth, then have the child taken away and given to a straight, religious couple for adoption.:rolleyes:
Yes. Were you not paying attention to the news last year?
Anyway, if abortion was outlawed, the penalties should be on the doctors. Loss of medical license if convicted of preforming pre-viability abortions, jail terms for murder if the baby was a. viable and b. healthy. If b is not true, then whatever charges would apply to assisted suicide in that state should apply here (with the understanding that the state may not choose to prosecute the case).
Why only the doctors? To use the analogy of murder, a hired hitman may be the one guilty of actually committing the murder, but the person who hired them is not considered blameless.
Why these distinctions? AFAIK, murder doesn’t stop being murder if the victim happened to be terminally ill, for example.
I’m personally in favor of abortion rights, but if somebody’s going to outlaw abortion on the grounds that abortion is morally equivalent to murder, I think the only logically consistent and morally principled approach is to treat abortion as if it were murder. If even the most vocal abortion-is-murder “pro-life” advocates don’t support that, I think that makes their rhetoric somewhat disingenuous.
Or if you think that abortion isn’t equivalent to murder but support banning it anyway, what’s the rationale for that?
A desire to control the means of (re)production?
So, one crazy guy…that’s it? That’s all?
It would appear as though ‘killing a viable fetus’ is really not a good equivalent to abortion-as-currently-defined-in-law, if that’s how seldom it occurs. Efforts to persuade people that killing a viable fetus is the same thing as abortion would seem to be rather disingenuous.
Then abortion shouldn’t be against the law…yet there are countries where women and/or fetuses/babies die because it is illegal to do a therapeutic abortion in such cases.
If the state makes abortion illegal then they (we) should make some sort of alternative available for a woman who wants or needs to no longer be pregnant. A woman has many ways of ending a pregnancy without going to a doctor - many of those ways are dangerous. To protect women and the unborn fetus from themselves the state would need to implament a policy that allows a woman to give up a fetus without aborting it. So, we would then need a means to remove a fetus, from 1 day old up to 9 months, and a way of keeping it alive and healthy until a new mommy and daddy can be found.
Or, we could make abortion illegal, force all pregnant women to carry to term then, using DNA testing, find the father and give him the option of taking complete responsibility for the child or spending the rest of his life in jail. Laws would change PDQ.
The general public would never stand for abortion being penalized the same as murder, so a lighter sentence would have to do. Maybe a stiff fine and several thousand hours of community service.
The “general public” would never stand for abortion being penalized in the first place, so the entire issue is a thought exercise.
This isn’t a religious belief, it’s a moral one.
There are people of all religious stripes, and of no religion, who oppose abortion rights.
Yup. The myth about ‘tens of thousands of women’ is just that, nonsense. The actual decline in abortion-related maternal mortality was due mostly to medical advances and safer procedures, and the actual number of deaths from illegal abortions in 1972 was trivial (around 40) not ‘tens of thousands’.
I believe I posted the sentence for such a ‘crime’ in a former thread on this, but IMHO it should be knowing she has killed her own child, and having to live with that and deal with the consequences for the rest of her life.
There is not much more to do, as the child never entered the state’s authority and does not have such protection or consideration. Only inside the woman’s authority does the child reside. She is God to the child, she is everything to the child. God decided who lives and who dies, who can stand before God, but God must also live with (God’s) decisions.
It may surprise you to learn that what may or may not fall under the state’s authority is decided by the state, not your personal religious beliefs.
I think that the mafia would take you up on that.
“Your honor, we plead guilty to all of those contract killings and will now leave the court free men who have to live with the fact that we did that.”