7 votes

Can Abortions Be Stopped Without Being Criminalized?

http://atr.rollcall.com/scott-desjarlais-re-election-hopes-s...

I noticed that Representative Scott DesJarlais may have passed his primary, which will most likely assure him another term. DesJarlais is a pro-life doctor and congressman that had sex with his patients and counseled one of them to have an abortion. For this staggering lack of integrity, there doesn't seem much in the way of consequences.

This points to a cruel reality though: not everybody who is pro-life in public is pro-life in their day-to-day lives.

I am about as far from a pro-life advocate as you can come. I'm fully in support of legalizing access to abortions for anyone that can afford them (you know, out of their own pocket). At the same time, however, I've counseled anyone considering one all throughout my life not to get one. To worry about how a child will grow up as they are growing up, and to recognize that a lot of parents started out in humble circumstances; it was having children that crystallized what they wanted in life and the sacrifices that would be necessary to get those things.

Unfortunately, guys only tell you about abortions long after they have conspired with their wives or girlfriends to get one. My wife, however, because women tell each other everything, has probably stopped at least two lives from being terminated, lives that are wonderful, and have made their mothers more wonderful, too.

Before abortion was legal, women still got them, but they got them in private homes and in hotel rooms, and the men that performed them were frequently unlicensed. What's more, even the very best abortionists could not stop that women could not go to hospitals afterwards; if they were found to have taken pregnancy inducing drugs in a hospital, this information was required to be reported to police.

Criminalization always has this effect. It jails people in unfortunate circumstances for being taken advantage of by others. It dissuades them from seeking counseling or other help. It necessitates insane invasions of personal privacy.

Criminalizing abortion requires selective application of the criminal code, meaning the poorest people will be criminalized by it and the richest elude being criminalized by it, despite similar or even more egregious behavior on the part of the rich. Such a criminal code would be created and maintained by people like our Represantative DesJarlais, who, behind closed doors, counsels his girlfriends to get an abortion so that he is not embarrassed by the child he produced.

Criminalizing abortion may be the way to feel like we've done something to stop abortion, but really we're just creating a new police state apparatus to do what we can do as individuals more effectively and without jailing a soul, invading their privacy or empowering or enriching the police state: listen to them, wait for them to ask us what we would do, and counsel them against it.



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Ron Paul on abortions

Ron Paul believes that the ninth and tenth amendments to the U.S. Constitution do not grant the federal government any authority to legalize or ban abortion. Instead, it is up to the individual states to prohibit abortion: http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/abortion/

-

-

The cheese stands alone. The proof is in the pudding.

Abortion is only 'bad' when it encroaches on freedom

I don't think the goal should be to "stop abortion," but instead to "maximize freedom." Framing the conversation in that way allows us to react correctly when an abortion happens that shouldn't (when the mother encroaches on the baby's freedom), as well as when an abortion should happen (when the baby is encroaching on the mother's freedom).

When is a mother encroaching on her child's freedom? Well, certainly, if it's already the third trimester and the baby can survive outside of the mother, aborting it is a clear encroachment of the baby's freedom.

When is a baby encroaching on a mother's freedom? It sounds silly, but indeed, it can occur. Example: If the baby is too young to survive outside the womb, and is killing the mother more quickly that she can give birth (they may be somewhat rare, but any number of disorders can cause a pregnant woman to lose her life), then that baby is encroaching on the mothers freedom, and abortion would cause freedom to be maximized. There is no way that allowing both the baby and mother to die maximizes freedom.

It's all the stuff in between that is difficult to discuss and agree on. But again, framing the argument from a stance of maximizing freedom as opposed to "life," "kindness," "being good/moral," or whatever, gives you a much more objective (instead of subjective) perspective. That's because "freedom" is an objective concept (a state of being, wherein no one is forcing their will on anyone else), whereas "maximizing life," "being kind," "being good," "being moral," and every other sentimentality are all incredibly subjective.

Abortion will always be difficult to talk about. But we will never get anywhere with moral absolutes like, "killing is wrong," "abortion is evil," and "abortion is murder." Is killing a murderer whose got a loaded gun to your teenage daughter's head 'wrong?' Is aborting a baby that is killing your teenage daughter from the inside 'wrong?'

I would have to say no, it's not wrong, because my moral absolutes are linked only to freedom, not to "never killing," "never harming anything that looks cute," or all the sentimental crap people come up with that sounds good in theory, but doesn't work in practice.

I would say the opposite:

I would say the opposite: stopping abortion is bad when it limits freedom. Talking about abortion in terms of the mother's life is disingenous--this accounts for but a miniscule percentage of aborted babies. The crime most aborted babies have committed is encroaching on a woman's "right" to live as if she has not become pregnant.

All people should love copiously, but they should always take precautions and ultimately be prepared to face the consequences of their actions. A baby is not the end of a life; it is the beginning of one. And, ultimately, it's three or four years out of your life before the kid is school-aged. I can't remember four-year periods in my late teens and early twenties. What's so important to these women, and the men that have impregnated them?

I guess you think it's none of my business. That's fair. I don't think the state has the right to become involved in it in any way, and I'm guessing in that we agree.

I don't believe abortions

I don't believe abortions will ever be totally stopped, but they can be drastically reduced with education on what an abortion procedure entails and what the side effects are after. I think the internet has gone a long way in educating people, especially young people who are more prolife now than their adult counterparts.

To forbid breeds defiance, to educate encourages responsible choices.

https://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=100003035859289&sk=info

Can murder be stopped without being criminalized?

Has criminalizing murder stopped murder? Since it hasn't, should it be legal since people are going to go ahead and murder anyway?
Killing your child after he is born is illegal. Why should killing him before he is born be legal?
It isn't a matter of a woman's choice, or the ownership of her body. The law dictates to people lots of prohibitions as to what they can and can't do with their bodies.
The question is whether a person is protected by the law before he is born.
The reason for abortion prohibition laws, prior to the SCOTUS ruled on something it had no business ruling on, was abortion was considered more dangerous than childbirth. The protection of the baby's life was not a consideration.
Ron Paul's position on the issue is that the Congress should pass a bill removing the issue from the SCOTUS, so it cannot rule on that. Then throw it back to the states to regulate. He said he could not get pro-life groups interested in that approach. Pro-life as well as Pro-death groups are more interested in keeping it an issue for fund-raising purposes.

[F]orce can only settle questions of power, not of right. - Clyde N. Wilson

In my eyes abortion is murder

So why make it safer on the murderer? My wife is of the same opinion. The life you take is not your own.

There are so many people out there looking to adopt (different battle altogether; stupid government) and still who are you to judge that a child will grow up wrong simply because they are raised poor? So many people who started with nothing are now super successful and many more are just super happy with their lives. How would you feel if somebody came up, put a gun to your head, said some circumstance of your life means you'll most likely turn out bad, and then pulled the trigger?

There will never be a way to stop abortion because there are always going to be people who want them. However, I don't think we should legitimize taking the life of the most helpless and innocent of persons.


http://youtu.be/kPF1FhCMPuQ

EDIT : Stupid youtube; how do you copy a URL that isn't on the page?

what we should "legitimize"

what we should "legitimize" is freedom. would you have a woman whose baby was killing her just lay down and take it? all because you want to protect the precious, cute children? sentimentality is crap, and your framing of the issue does little to advance the argument. you would empower police and governments, all because you think children are cute, cuddly and innocent? well, I think they're all those things too, but if one was threatening a woman's freedom, then she should be free of criticism and legally within her rights to get an abortion.

Ah, I see your point

So when a three year old threatens her freedom to go out when she chooses she should be legally within her rights and free of criticism to kill that child?

But wait; there's more. Due to current laws if the sperm donor doesn't want to pay child support he should be within his rights to force her to get an abortion so the child doesn't tread on his freedoms?

But wait; there's more. Does your argument simply boil down to the child has no rights and we should just accept that until some arbitrary age the natural rights we currently take for granted just don't apply to this person? It has no rights to life or liberty and is subject to the whims of society up to and including death by one of a plethora of horrible methods?

As far from consistent as you can get?

> I am about as far from a pro-life advocate
> as you can come. ...
> I've counseled anyone considering an abortion
> all throughout my life not to get one.

Schizophrenia much?

Thank you for reading. You

Thank you for reading.

You see it as a contradiction. I don't. I have been and maybe always will be against a legislative solution to abortion; on the other hand, that does not make me opposed to any solution. Therefore, I am not your typical pro-life advocate, even though I have been.

Again

The argument is always muddled. Planned Parenthood gets a near $600 million dollars a year from the Feds (the people). That's not tax breaks or other figures, it is straight up subsidy, keeping the price of Abortions way too low. Almost makes it a very attractive option and the people are paying for this type of creepy situation.

Ideally Abortions would be rare, but where everyone is with the issue at the moment, it needs a slow adjustment. Abortions cannot be banned overnight.
Libs in California wouldn't just let that happen, without an astronomical amount of litigation. It would be turmoil.

It is all about that cash flow. CUT IT OFF NOW. Start by moving to a free market system, with the same (sometimes asinine) regulations you have in hospitals and leave that mess to the States.

I recently was pushed over the edge on the issue when I received a very fancy Card for my wallet in the mail from Planned Parenthood. Since I am a Male, I definitely needed a mailer advertising "emergency contraceptive". Great use of that $600 million. Little too much money on your hands?

Correct...

"The argument is always muddled. Planned Parenthood gets a near $600 million dollars a year from the Feds (the people)."

Correct, and if some lamebrain Republican friend tells you that he/she can't vote Libertarian because he/she is pro-life, remind him her that the GOP-controlled House votes for these appropriations. (A pro choice Libertarian President would not give one brass penny of our taxes to Planned Parenthood.) Their pro-life commitment only lasts until you cast your vote for them. Don't be duped.

Planned Parenthood has net assets of $1.2 billion and ran an $87 million surplus in 2012. The pro life Republicans in Congress are the biggest facilitators of abortion in the country.

Don't get me started on their pro-war stance. The last time I checked, war was not pro life, but as someone so aptly said: pro-lifers believe that life starts at conception and ends at our borders.

Plano TX

I've been to Planned

I've been to Planned Parenthood to help a friend with an abortion. They don't do abortions there. They refer you to a doctor that does. Sometimes abortion doctors moonlight at PP, but to say "The Feds give PP money. People go to PP to get abortions. Therefore the Feds are paying for abortions at PP," is not just false, it's disingenuous.

How much longer to we have to hear about this crap that the Feds are sponsoring abortion through Planned Parenthood? I'm against the practice of giving any tax money to PP, but only because I'm against taxes and a federal government at all.

Well

Wherever one stands on the issue. This is not true. Absolutely not in California. Maybe your state does not allow it to be done in-house or something. But......

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-info/abortion/in-cli...

"
-Medical procedures that end pregnancy
-Safe and effective Available from many Planned Parenthood health centers
-Costs about $300–$950 in the first trimester"

Refute this...

... I'm always willing to learn...

Wikipedia:

Planned Parenthood is the largest U.S. provider of reproductive health services, including cancer screening, HIV screening and counseling, contraception, and abortion.[4][5][6] Contraception accounts for 35% of PPFA's total services and abortions account for 3%; PPFA conducts roughly 300,000 abortions each year, among 3 million people served.[7][8][9]

7.^ Jump up to: a b "Planned Parenthood, abortion and the budget fight". Seattle Times. April 8, 2011. Retrieved 2012-11-03.
8.Jump up ^ Conan, Neal (March 8, 2011). "Manning Up and Planned Parenthood". NPR. Retrieved 2011-07-12.
9.^ Jump up to: a b "Planned Parenthood Federation of America 2008–2009 Annual Report" (PDF). Planned Parenthood. 2011. Retrieved 2011-04-14.

Lomk: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood

Plano TX

Here! Here! Female here

"I recently was pushed over the edge on the issue when I received a very fancy Card for my wallet in the mail from Planned Parenthood. Since I am a Male, I definitely needed a mailer advertising "emergency contraceptive. Great use of that $600 million. Little too much money on your hands?"

great point! But Hitlery, Clinton, Boxer, Pelosi and company will keep fighting us indefinitely.

Thomas Jefferson said, of another issue, "To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical." However, it fits this situation to a T, as well.

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

I am just beside myself in

I am just beside myself in sadness, you actually received such a card in the mail? "Emergency contraceptive", some of these times I really want to go back to using cuss words. The nerve of these psychos, literally advertising the murder of children through the mail. Their day will come on judgment and they will be on their knees begging God for mercy and he will give none and so rightfully so.

Pray for women everywhere who are being tempted by the Devil to murder their child because it would 'inconvenience' their life and career path. This is where feminism is just raping the minds of women. Children are a blessing not a curse. Contraception is not healthcare.

Win their spirit.

Win their spirit anyway possible. Show women they are murderers as plain as day and show men they are a party to murder. Show them that life is precious. Make them see their life as an avoided abortion. Tell them about Ron Paul's story as a resident where the baby was put in a bucket to die like it didn't exist, show them how sick that is. Put the fear of God into them. Make women outcasts who get them. Don't laugh at comedian's abortion jokes and rebuke them in front of your 'friends'. Don't impregnate whores. Stand in front of abortion clinics, bring children, plead with women not to murder their child. Tell them you will adopt their child. Tell them if not for their child then for their own spirit as after the death comes the judgment. Tell them about Pascal's wager even if you yourself don't believe in the Creator. Show them they are human, not an animal.

Do ANYTHING besides support it. If you do, you are just as bad as a murderer in God's eyes.

Win hearts

I am politically pro-life, but I also recognize that simply outlawing abortion will not solve the problem.

It's similar to the environmental movement. When environmentalists use the force of law to force people to save the planet, there is resentment and resistance. But when they educate and appeal to people's better nature, people voluntarily recycle, conserve, and otherwise find ways to improve the quality of the environment.

To save lives, we need to teach people of the sanctity of each individual life. Children are blessings, not curses. A society in which babies are preserved instead of aborted is a humane society. Mothers are blessed. Each human being is of infinite worth from the moment that person exists.

"Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice." -- Thomas Paine

Here are some groups doing it, one heart at a time:

http://www.feministsforlife.org/

http://www.abort73.com/
These folks have some really edgy T-shirts, and some not so. One of the more edgy says:
"Would it bother us more if they used guns?"
(Seeming to be anti gun control and pro-life at the same time :) The site even admits that the shirts are not so much for education, but to steer people to the site, where they can learn more at their leisure.

http://www.liveaction.org
This investigative group was started by a 15 year old. They investigate actual crimes Planned (un)Parenthood is involved in either perpetrating or covering up.

This is not to discount all the crisis pregnancy centers who are on the frontlines of this. They deserve your support.

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

Couldn't agree more.

Couldn't agree more.