# Pro-lifers: What should the punishment for getting an abortion be? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 11, 2006, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-lifers-what-should-the-punishment-for-getting-an-abortion-be/347899 "2006-03-11T00:54:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 19
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2006, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-lifers-what-should-the-punishment-for-getting-an-abortion-be/347899/361 "2006-03-17T04:02:57Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > The question is not _whether_ it is allowable for the law to make exceptions but rather on what basis (of law and/or reasoning) you justify exempting mothers from criminal prosecution for aborting their babies (with the assumption that others such as doctors will be prosecuted for that very thing)? This is post #361, and that question was answered at [post #135](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=7187823&postcount=135). You just don’t like the answer. And I don’t think, 226 post later, anyone’s mind is going to be changed. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2006, 4:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-lifers-what-should-the-punishment-for-getting-an-abortion-be/347899/362 "2006-03-17T04:30:24Z")
> [@Walloon](#): > > This is post #361, and that question was answered at [post #135](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=7187823&postcount=135). You just don’t like the answer. And I don’t think, 226 post later, anyone’s mind is going to be changed. It was never answered because you refuse to explain how it “protects” the unborn to refuse to punish the women who “murder” the unborn. You keep crowing that it’s all about “protecting” the unborn, yet when it comes right down to it, your plan (that you claim isn’t your plan, so whose is it?) will not and cannot protect the unborn because you will not and cannot take any steps to prevent a woman from seeking an abortion. Joe Schmoe wants to stop people from kerfluffing. Lots of people kerfluffle. He decides to get a law passed to make kerfluffing a serious crime. But there will be no penalties for those who kerfluffle. There will be penalties for aiding a kerfluffle, but not only is self-kerfluffing possible, investigations into known kerfluffing will be extremely difficult. How much kerfluffing will he prevent by passing the law? Seriously, the only excuse I can come up with for most of this thread is that the anti-abortion people want some feel good legislation to appease the throngs of anti-abortion voters. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2006, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-lifers-what-should-the-punishment-for-getting-an-abortion-be/347899/363 "2006-03-17T04:53:57Z")
> [@Walloon](#): > > This is post #361, and that question was answered at [post #135](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=7187823&postcount=135). You just don’t like the answer. And I don’t think, 226 post later, anyone’s mind is going to be changed. Basically your answer in post #135 boils down to political expediency which while it may be political reality is bullshit in every other respect. ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2006, 5:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-lifers-what-should-the-punishment-for-getting-an-abortion-be/347899/364 "2006-03-17T05:15:41Z")
Like I said, it basically comes down to “I don’t like your answer!” ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2006, 6:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-lifers-what-should-the-punishment-for-getting-an-abortion-be/347899/365 "2006-03-17T06:23:55Z")
> [@Walloon](#): > > Like I said, it basically comes down to “I don’t like your answer!” I do not like your answer because it has no logic or rationale beyond political expediency. It makes zero sense from any rational viewpoint beyond political grandstanding for a particular constituency. If you think I am wrong about that and there is a logical rationale beyond “the law can’t be passed in any other form” (I am not quoting you…just highlighting that part) then feel free to enlighten me. I doubt you will though. This entire thread you have been unwilling to stake out your position and defend it. Mostly you have contented yourself with one or two line zingers to goose others. You have avoided direct questions put to you time and again so you are right, I do not like your answers. Not because they disagree with my viewpoints but because they can only be considered answers in the most generous use of the word. ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2006, 6:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-lifers-what-should-the-punishment-for-getting-an-abortion-be/347899/366 "2006-03-17T06:45:25Z")
If you don’t believe in political expediency, well, too bad. But it is an answer to the question, and it is realistic. I quite disagree with you: political expeidency is VERY logical. Supporting an abortion law that would never pass (i.e., targeting pregnant women) is very _illogical_. ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2006, 10:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-lifers-what-should-the-punishment-for-getting-an-abortion-be/347899/367 "2006-03-17T10:48:45Z")
> [@saoirse](#): > > If abortion is a crime, it follows that the person primarily responsible for the crime should be prosecuted. Doctors do not sneak up and perform abortions on unsuspecting women. If I hire someone to commit a crime, I am just as guilty as the person who committed the crime, no matter how much more sympathy people might have for me. You can’t say equal protection exists when such an indulgence is given to a criminal based only upon the sympathy they engender in the general public. Why is equal protection violated if every woman who seeks an abortion is exempt from prosecution? Equal protection recognizes that there are different “categories” of people who can legitimately be effected differently by a law. ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2006, 10:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-lifers-what-should-the-punishment-for-getting-an-abortion-be/347899/368 "2006-03-17T10:56:56Z")
> [@SteveG1](#): > > Here’s a refresher of the cite in question…\I bolded the main bones of contention for your convenience. Now I see. I provided that cite as evidence that a pro-life position needn’t be religious, not as a cite that is necessarily consistent with my position. As a matter of fact, I specifically noted I’m religious. Those guys don’t speak for me. > [@](#): > > Let’s take some unrelated but highly visilbe examples, just to make a point. 9/11 and its aftermath. OK? Which “highly regarded religious leaders” were actually happy over the attacks and used them as an excuse to attack their fellow Americans and pass spurios moral judgements, but did squat to send any aid or comfort to the many victims? Hint… Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson. > Who said the giant tsunami in Indonesia was God’s judgement and they deserved what they got? That “highly regarded religious leader” Pat Robertson. > Who said the hurricane that hit New Orleans was God’s judgement? Pat Robertson. > Who is one of the strongest opponents of birth control for poor countries, which need birth control and education most, and has always - regardless of the individual in office - opposed all abortion, birth control, and or sex education? The Pope. > All judgement and no aid or comfort. Don’t make me go on. I can pull shitloads of cites and newspaper reports if I have to. Do you think this “evidence” concludes that religious people, on the whole, are less likely to want to help people? You need to try again. If you want to use the Pope as an example, are you excluding Catholic charities and hospitals? Be consistent. > [@](#): > > It’s in the Bill of Rights, under the umbrella or “penumbra” of the rights of the person to be secure in their blah blah blah. Can you quote the part of the COnstituion for me that supports what you think it supprts? Thanks. > [@](#): > > Sorry, but I don’t buy the “do as I say and not as I do” argument. If an individual does something they say is wrong, then they have given up any right to judge anyone else for making the same decision under the same conditions. Whether it is typical or not begs the question of HYPOCRISY. I noted it was hypocritical. Are you suggesting I’m making some different argument? > [@](#): > > Now as to my contempt for Fox News. These are the people who still claim there were WMD in Iraq, that there is a war on Christmas, that we should feel sorry for Cheney that he shot that “old guy”, and that any time Bush’s polls go from uhhh 35 percent approval to 36 percent (not the actual numbers but you get the point) it is a major upswing. But this isn’t about Bush or Cheney or O’Reilly. It’s about my lack of confidence in any of the horse shit they try to peddle as news. I have more respect for the National Enquirer, or Weekly World News at this point. Fine. This would still be a logical fallacy, however. ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2006, 10:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-lifers-what-should-the-punishment-for-getting-an-abortion-be/347899/369 "2006-03-17T10:59:12Z")
> [@Siege](#): > > You’re reply to **SteveG1** implied that the Religious Right was not involved in the issues I mentioned. Surely you must have considered how it would be taken. I just noticed this part of your post. No, I don’t believe my post implied that and did not for a second consider that it would be taken the way you did. I expressly noted that I was responding to the notion that religious people are opposed to spending money and energy. Not sure how much more explicit that could be. ---
**Author:** ![saoirse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5daacb/32.png) [@saoirse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/saoirse)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2006, 1:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-lifers-what-should-the-punishment-for-getting-an-abortion-be/347899/370 "2006-03-17T13:41:29Z")
> [@Walloon](#): > > This is post #361, and that question was answered at [post #135](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=7187823&postcount=135). You just don’t like the answer. And I don’t think, 226 post later, anyone’s mind is going to be changed. But it wasn’t answered then. Political expediency is fine, but it cannot be the justification for an exception to the principle of equal protection. ---
**Author:** ![holmes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e95f7d/32.png) [@holmes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/holmes)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2006, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-lifers-what-should-the-punishment-for-getting-an-abortion-be/347899/371 "2006-03-17T14:16:52Z")
> [@Stratocaster](#): > > Why is equal protection violated if every woman who seeks an abortion is exempt from prosecution? Equal protection recognizes that there are different “categories” of people who can legitimately be effected differently by a law. > [@](#): > > STATE SEN. BILL NAPOLI (R) > A real-life description to me would be a rape victim, brutally raped, savaged. The girl was a virgin. She was religious. She planned on saving her virginity until she was married. She was brutalized and raped, sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it, and is impregnated. I mean, that girl could be so messed up, physically and psychologically, that carrying that child could very well threaten her life. I’m not a virgin, I was drugged and raped (not brutalized, not sodomized), I’m not a religious person and as a lesbian I can’t get married. I’m a tough chick and am not “messed” up, but I don’t want to carry the child of my rapist. Do I fit Sen. Napoli’s profile? Doesn’t look that way to me, so every woman isn’t allowed the ‘exception’, only the ones that Napoli feels are ‘special’. Do you still believe all women are treated equally under this law, according to Sen. Napoli’s rules of exception? ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2006, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-lifers-what-should-the-punishment-for-getting-an-abortion-be/347899/372 "2006-03-17T14:24:04Z")
If Senator Napoli said that was the only exception, I’d agree with you. But that’s not what he said. He gave an example. ---
**Author:** ![holmes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e95f7d/32.png) [@holmes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/holmes)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2006, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-lifers-what-should-the-punishment-for-getting-an-abortion-be/347899/373 "2006-03-17T14:55:11Z")
C’mon. The guy’s asked what type of case he would consider worthy of exception and he spins this fancy of a religious girl, a virgin, of course, beaten half to death, fucked up the ass (of course), who’s now been driven insane by the event. Do you consider that example as being a realistic? C’mon, shame the devil and be honest. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2006, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-lifers-what-should-the-punishment-for-getting-an-abortion-be/347899/374 "2006-03-17T15:11:02Z")
> [@Stratocaster](#): > > Why is equal protection violated if every woman who seeks an abortion is exempt from prosecution? Equal protection recognizes that there are different “categories” of people who can legitimately be effected differently by a law. Can you give a few real life examples of times when belonging to a different “category” of people makes a crime into a non-criminal action? ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2006, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-lifers-what-should-the-punishment-for-getting-an-abortion-be/347899/375 "2006-03-17T15:20:41Z")
> [@holmes](#): > > C’mon. The guy’s asked what type of case he would consider worthy of exception and he spins this fancy of a religious girl, a virgin, of course, beaten half to death, fucked up the ass (of course), who’s now been driven insane by the event. Exactly. He didn’t just say, “Oh, a rape victim.” He invented an extreme scenario, and then said well _she_ would be an exception. If any rape victim would be an exception, why didn’t he say that? Why use a standard that so few women would ever be able to meet? My guess is because he doesn’t want the standard to be met, that he gave this example because this is the only type of exception he’d make. And, of course, it would please the people who want to punish the sluts. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2006, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-lifers-what-should-the-punishment-for-getting-an-abortion-be/347899/376 "2006-03-17T16:04:04Z")
> [@Stratocaster](#): > > This would still be a logical fallacy, however. Distrusting known liars is a “logical fallacy” _how_ ? ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2006, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-lifers-what-should-the-punishment-for-getting-an-abortion-be/347899/377 "2006-03-17T17:32:44Z")
> [@Stratocaster](#): > > Can you quote the part of the COnstituion for me that supports what you think it supprts? Thanks.I noted it was hypocritical. Are you suggesting I’m making some different argument?Fine. This would still be a logical fallacy, however. I believe someone else already posted it, so don’t waste my time. So far, you really have had nothing to say, and nothing to back it up - no logic and no trustworthy cites. I’m bailing out - this thread is no longer worth any of my time. I had a fairly long post earlier in the thread, and none of it was addressed or refuted. So, have fun, see ya around. ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2006, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-lifers-what-should-the-punishment-for-getting-an-abortion-be/347899/378 "2006-03-17T22:40:06Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > …He didn’t just say, “Oh, a rape victim.” He invented an extreme scenario, and then said well _she_ would be an exception. If any rape victim would be an exception, why didn’t he say that? Why use a standard that so few women would ever be able to meet? My guess is because he doesn’t want the standard to be met, that he gave this example because this is the only type of exception he’d make. > > And, of course, it would please the people who want to punish the sluts. Exactly, I was fascinated, that when the question was about abortion, he kept mentioning sodomy, apparently SD needs a better sex ed program! Does their hypocrisy know no bounds?[ > [@](#): > > When Is an Abortion Not an Abortion? > TIME’s Nancy Gibbs explores the meaning of the South Dakota Abortion Ban > By NANCY GIBBS > Posted Monday, Mar. 06, 2006 > > …I talked to Representative Roger Hunt, the main sponsor of HB 1215, about why the bill was written as it was. Why, for instance, did they reject the standard exception to protect the health of the mother? Because, he says, that phrase is far too stretchy. “If we were talking of pure, serious health concerns,” that would be one thing, Hunt said. But “health” can mean economic health, mental health. “It becomes an open barn door for anyone who wants an abortion. We might as well not have the legislation at all”. > > But what about cases of rape and incest, where there is overwhelming public support for allowing abortion as an option? Here the lawmakers admit that they carved out a little gray area. Hunt notes that the bill forbids doctors from prescribing any drug or doing any procedure on a pregnant woman “with the specific intent” of ending a pregnancy. It also protects the right of women to use “ a contraceptive measure, drug or chemical, if it is administered prior to the time when a pregnancy could be determined through conventional medical testing…” > > **In other words, a woman presenting herself to an emergency room immediately after a rape, Hunt says, would be able to use emergency contraception; the trick is that she has to do within the first few days after the assault, before any test can determine whether she was pregnant in the first place. The lawmakers concluded that it’s OK for a rape victim to have an abortion, so long as she doesn’t know for certain that she’s doing it.** > > So why not have an exemption for all rape victims, including the ones who are too shattered to report an assault right away? Hunt calls it “a fine line that we’re walking, but some of this is just to show that we’re being fair and reasonable. In cases where we cannot determine if there’s an unborn child or not, we’re trying to be sympathetic to a woman who alleges she’s been raped.” But the sympathy expires after about a week. “Very honestly,” Hunt adds, “We don’t want to have a lot of abortion clinics questioning a woman and having the woman say ‘well, I was raped four months ago, I need an abortion. We’re trying to be sensitive to women who are legitimate rape victims—and not give abortion clinics a chance to commit fraud on system.”… > > … **And even if rape victims do get themselves to a hospital for treatment, she {Kate Looby, the state director of Planned Parenthood S.D.} adds, it may not do any good. “We’ve introduced a bill requiring emergency room doctors to tell assault victims about emergency contraception—they’re not required to provide it, just to tell patients about it—and that bill has repeatedly failed in the South Dakota Legislature.” South Dakota was among the earliest states to allow pharmacists to refuse to dispense Plan B, the “morning-after pill,” if doing so violated their conscience.** ]([http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1170368,00.html](http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1170368,00.html))[RIGHT] **Bold** Underlined=CMC[/RIGHT] IIRC one of the arguments used to oppose RU486 was/is “it’s a dangerous drug with terrible side effects”. Brilliant strategy, make it difficult to get, and too scary to use, a self-closing loophole. CMC fnord! ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2006, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-lifers-what-should-the-punishment-for-getting-an-abortion-be/347899/379 "2006-03-18T01:22:36Z")
> [@holmes](#): > > I’m not a virgin, I was drugged and raped (not brutalized, not sodomized), I’m not a religious person and as a lesbian I can’t get married. I’m a tough chick and am not “messed” up, but I don’t want to carry the child of my rapist. > > Do I fit Sen. Napoli’s profile? Doesn’t look that way to me, so every woman isn’t allowed the ‘exception’, only the ones that Napoli feels are ‘special’. > > Do you still believe all women are treated equally under this law, according to Sen. Napoli’s rules of exception? Yes, I see your point. But I think Napoli is just posturing for the base. That description is not consistent with the law as it was written. ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2006, 1:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-lifers-what-should-the-punishment-for-getting-an-abortion-be/347899/380 "2006-03-18T01:26:01Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > Can you give a few real life examples of times when belonging to a different “category” of people makes a crime into a non-criminal action? Drinking is illegal for minors. It is not for adults. It’s against the law for me to walk into the women’s restroom. You may cruise on in. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-lifers-what-should-the-punishment-for-getting-an-abortion-be/347899.md?page=18) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-lifers-what-should-the-punishment-for-getting-an-abortion-be/347899.md?page=20)