Questions for the new abortion debate
As I’ve said in previous posts, I say let the conservatives go for an abortion ban, as they’ve done in South Dakota and are attempting to do in other states. No matter how painful it may be to people who have fought hard for reproductive rights and women’s rights in general, it needs to happen. Their bluff has to be called so people can see how dangerous these lunatics are. It goes beyond the right to have an abortion.
For too long, thanks to conservatives controlling the debate on just about every issue, it’s been about whether or not a fetus is a living human being and whether or not aborting the fetus is tantamount to murder. Now that the elimination of abortion as a right is on the horizon, I feel that it’s time to ask some more pointed questions about life in an anti-choice society and get pro-life candidates—particularly people like John McCain who like to walk the centrist line on other issues and be a faux populist—and show America just what they’re thinking.
--What should the penalties be for a doctor performing abortions and for the woman getting an abortion and for anyone who has knowledge of it? Putting doctors behind bars is one thing (anyone can portray them as being rich soulless bastards), but proposing, say, a 10-year hard time sentence for your average middle class woman who drives a minivan is another. Also, think about prosecuting as accomplices the relatives of your average woman—the elderly parents, the husbands, older children—and it gets even tougher. Man, this is going to make the lawyers rich! And if the conservatives don’t propose prison time, they’re soft on crime.
--What status will fetuses have? Are they people or something in between nothingness and human? If they’re people, that means they should be granted rights. Parents should be allowed to get benefits from their government, including health care if needed and tax deductions. What is the government willing to do to help mothers who have carried unwanted pregnancies to birth because that is all they could do? A bevy of socialist entitlement programs should be created and administered at full taxpayer expense, don’t you think? If they’re something in between and not allowed any rights, then why is that the case and why do they get to decide a new category of life? Also, if this is the case, a good 14th amendment case can make it in the courts asking why fetuses, like blacks before them, are not considered full people.
--Why are there any exceptions, as there most likely will be in many states for rape and incest (though not in South Dakota) and for a pregnancy endangering a woman’s life? If a fetus is a human being created by God and aborting it is murder, then how can there be any exceptions since it would still be aborting a person no matter how it was conceived or what danger it poses to the woman? Shouldn’t God decide what to do with such conceptions?
--If rape and incest are exceptions, under what standard are they allowed before the eventual birth of the child? Does rape/incest have to be proven in a court of law through the conviction of the rapist? Will extreme pro-life groups be putting their resources into tying up such cases in appeals so that the babies can be born, which will put them on the uncomfortable side of supporting rapists?
--What rights does a rapist father have to see his baby? If he doesn’t have rights, why not?
--What are their thoughts on contraception? Should it be banned as well? What do they think about sexual intercourse—is it meant just for procreation? Enquiring minds want to know.
--Do they think women are property of the state and/or their husbands, and what other rights are they looking to take away?
--Why is it necessary that women not have this choice?
--How do you stop people from going to other states and/or countries and having an abortion performed legally?
--If a woman miscarries, will a murder investigation be performed? A distraught woman suffering a miscarriage makes an excellent defendant in a murder case, don’t you think?
Some of these questions might border on the ridiculous, but it’s easy to see where the anti-abortion logic takes you. They’re creating a ridiculous situation by eliminating this choice. You can probably imagine the conservative responses to most of these questions—it’ll be in character with their standard responses to everything else. Maybe then everyone will see them for the cruel, heartless bastards they are.
For too long, thanks to conservatives controlling the debate on just about every issue, it’s been about whether or not a fetus is a living human being and whether or not aborting the fetus is tantamount to murder. Now that the elimination of abortion as a right is on the horizon, I feel that it’s time to ask some more pointed questions about life in an anti-choice society and get pro-life candidates—particularly people like John McCain who like to walk the centrist line on other issues and be a faux populist—and show America just what they’re thinking.
--What should the penalties be for a doctor performing abortions and for the woman getting an abortion and for anyone who has knowledge of it? Putting doctors behind bars is one thing (anyone can portray them as being rich soulless bastards), but proposing, say, a 10-year hard time sentence for your average middle class woman who drives a minivan is another. Also, think about prosecuting as accomplices the relatives of your average woman—the elderly parents, the husbands, older children—and it gets even tougher. Man, this is going to make the lawyers rich! And if the conservatives don’t propose prison time, they’re soft on crime.
--What status will fetuses have? Are they people or something in between nothingness and human? If they’re people, that means they should be granted rights. Parents should be allowed to get benefits from their government, including health care if needed and tax deductions. What is the government willing to do to help mothers who have carried unwanted pregnancies to birth because that is all they could do? A bevy of socialist entitlement programs should be created and administered at full taxpayer expense, don’t you think? If they’re something in between and not allowed any rights, then why is that the case and why do they get to decide a new category of life? Also, if this is the case, a good 14th amendment case can make it in the courts asking why fetuses, like blacks before them, are not considered full people.
--Why are there any exceptions, as there most likely will be in many states for rape and incest (though not in South Dakota) and for a pregnancy endangering a woman’s life? If a fetus is a human being created by God and aborting it is murder, then how can there be any exceptions since it would still be aborting a person no matter how it was conceived or what danger it poses to the woman? Shouldn’t God decide what to do with such conceptions?
--If rape and incest are exceptions, under what standard are they allowed before the eventual birth of the child? Does rape/incest have to be proven in a court of law through the conviction of the rapist? Will extreme pro-life groups be putting their resources into tying up such cases in appeals so that the babies can be born, which will put them on the uncomfortable side of supporting rapists?
--What rights does a rapist father have to see his baby? If he doesn’t have rights, why not?
--What are their thoughts on contraception? Should it be banned as well? What do they think about sexual intercourse—is it meant just for procreation? Enquiring minds want to know.
--Do they think women are property of the state and/or their husbands, and what other rights are they looking to take away?
--Why is it necessary that women not have this choice?
--How do you stop people from going to other states and/or countries and having an abortion performed legally?
--If a woman miscarries, will a murder investigation be performed? A distraught woman suffering a miscarriage makes an excellent defendant in a murder case, don’t you think?
Some of these questions might border on the ridiculous, but it’s easy to see where the anti-abortion logic takes you. They’re creating a ridiculous situation by eliminating this choice. You can probably imagine the conservative responses to most of these questions—it’ll be in character with their standard responses to everything else. Maybe then everyone will see them for the cruel, heartless bastards they are.
