This piece begins to reveal the extent to which social conservatism in this country uses language deceitfully. The hue and cry now being offered up by the Republicans, who don't want Trump to be their leader, is political convenience. OF COURSE, anyone who abets or participates in committing murder should be punished -- AND THEY'RE ALL FOR IT! But they can't say that! And so they trump up all this 'woman-is-victim' stuff just to make their sex-phobic misogyny sale-able. If they had the guts to express their beliefs, at least they'd be honest brokers.
3
i simply cite a protest banner I saw circa 1980's in Washington DC during a March to the Capitol : "If you're not pro-choice, keep it in your pants."
The majority of members of Congress occupying the Capitol are men.
The majority of members of Congress occupying the Capitol are men.
49
Thank you for this article.
Those of us who have actually had abortions need to start speaking out as well.
I had an abortion in 1984. I was just out of college, struggling to support myself, with a boyfriend who later admitted that he deliberately tried to get me pregnant so I "wouldn't leave him."
It was not a decision I took lightly, but, once made, was the only decision: the right decision.
I never had ONE MOMENT of regret or remorse. Never.
Those of us who have actually had abortions need to start speaking out as well.
I had an abortion in 1984. I was just out of college, struggling to support myself, with a boyfriend who later admitted that he deliberately tried to get me pregnant so I "wouldn't leave him."
It was not a decision I took lightly, but, once made, was the only decision: the right decision.
I never had ONE MOMENT of regret or remorse. Never.
90
Anybody want to start a pool on how long it is before we find out that the Donald has encouraged a girlfriend to get an abortion?
63
To my mind, having a child is entering into a contract with the society you live in. You agree to do your best to raise a thoughtful and considerate member of society, and to actively participate in the child's well-being for the rest of your life. This is a huge commitment and the fact that anti-choice activists would press people into it who are outright saying they don't want to or aren't ready is a mystery to me. It's not like we're short humans. We have plenty.
If I ever became pregnant, I'd like to have a conversation with one of these people, and say, okay, I won't abort, I'll remain pregnant. Just so long as you agree to adopt and raise the child.
Oh what's that? You don't think you should have to raise a child you don't want?
Me either.
If I ever became pregnant, I'd like to have a conversation with one of these people, and say, okay, I won't abort, I'll remain pregnant. Just so long as you agree to adopt and raise the child.
Oh what's that? You don't think you should have to raise a child you don't want?
Me either.
71
Terrific article, but even the author doesn't say everything that needs to be said. If an abortion is murder, and if an embryo or fetus has full human status, then why should the punishment for having an abortion be any less than the punishment for murdering a fully born baby or an adult? We are not just talking about jail. Why should women who have abortions not be placed on trial for murder, punishable by life imprisonment or capital punishment? Or ... is a fetus not really a full human being, after all?
72
No matter how thin you slice it, it's still a personal and private matter between a woman and her doctor. No one has rights over an another persons body.
62
Katha Pollitt’s clearly reasoned Op-Ed exposing the hypocrisy of the anti-abortion argument probably reflects a well-established response to anti-abortion policies but it was new to me. I’m grateful to Katha Pollit and the NYTimes presenting it here.
72
It has already been decided in this country that abortions are not murder, that there is not a human being that was murdered. Now, if you are speaking to the non-reality world of religious conservatism which the Republican Party adopted during the Reagan campaigns to get more voters....welll....I guess its murder in that pretending world and the mother, father, physician and any other co-conspiritors will have to face the pretending penalties.
8
Although you wouldn't know it going by our corporate media networks, studies have shown in many polls, including in the deep red states that women do NOT want Roe v Wade overturned by 70% especially in the age group 18-35. That also includes Republicans.
23
Thank you for this. I suspected the "pro-life" folks were hiding the ball and that Trump had "misspoke" the truth but I couldn't quite put it altogether. Everyone should see Kathleen Parker's piece in today's Washington Post. SHe is by far not the worst but even she hides behind the "let's not talk about hypotheticals" dodge. Trump seems to have gotten the memo b/c now he is no blathering about "hypotheticals" rather than the genuine consequences if he or his fellow Republican contenders actually get elected.
9
Please let's hold men responsible as well. It takes two to tango.
16
If abortion is murder, then it is justifiable homicide. Many of the anti-abortion crowd are also advocates for "Stand your ground" laws. If a pregnancy has the potential to ruin a women's life, how is that different from a home intruder?
21
Trump rose on a posture of audacious 'common sense' - a pub opinionator - whose apparent business success bestows extra cred.
In reality - good thinking requires serious knowledge & experience. Glib opinions may reflect an emotional impulse, a wish, braggadaccio, or manuever to close a deal & make the sale - but it is clearly a rotten foundation for determining wise policies.
Surely Trump would not buy Trump's 'unreal estate' of wobbly ideas !
In reality - good thinking requires serious knowledge & experience. Glib opinions may reflect an emotional impulse, a wish, braggadaccio, or manuever to close a deal & make the sale - but it is clearly a rotten foundation for determining wise policies.
Surely Trump would not buy Trump's 'unreal estate' of wobbly ideas !
3
There are consequences to killing your own child or someone else's child. Those consequences may come after life on this earth, much to the dismay of liberal NY Times readers. In some cases, the consequences come during time on this earth, when killers sometimes face up to their responsibility, and experience feelings of deep remorse. Not many NY Times readers would fall into this latter category, of course.
1
The anti-abortion creeps really would stone women to death for the sake of improving their own lot in an afterlife that is as unreal as their religion.
23
Why should we expect anything else from these extremists? I like DT´s answer to "should the man be punished". How many of these rich guys have abortions in their past? No, its an attack on middle class to poor women and children. The wealthy were always immune. Creating unwanted children or unaffordable kids destroys lives of them, their families, their neighborhoods, the schools. But that is the goal since 1980 of these nuts I guess, to siphon off as much wealth for them & their old guy buddies as possible and maybe stash it abroad with plans to get out themselves just as they took their companies out. What a scam for the USA:
13
In all these discussions around abortion, I never hear conservatives mention the MEN who impregnated the women who seek abortions. Why not track them down, hold them legally and financially accountable – maybe even imprison them? Or are these all cases of "immaculate conception"?
35
Truth is, more or less the Republicans think of women as breeding stock. They have no say on what goes on in their bodies. The GOP, the limited government guys, want to have considerable say over women's sexual activity. When the FDA is done away with, all those employees can become the Watch Over Women brigade, or WOW.
An unwanted pregnancy means some poor confused woman may be considering abortion. That is where the government steps in to protect her from victimhood. She'll get all the support she needs to carry that unwanted baby to term. Of course that is where government responsibility ends as she and her new baby are shoved out the door. The government is limited remember, so mom and her new baby get a wave goodbye as they go out to fend for themselves. Once again order is preserved.
The Donald needs to know this procedure before some aggressive interviewer again tries to get an actual answer out of him.
An unwanted pregnancy means some poor confused woman may be considering abortion. That is where the government steps in to protect her from victimhood. She'll get all the support she needs to carry that unwanted baby to term. Of course that is where government responsibility ends as she and her new baby are shoved out the door. The government is limited remember, so mom and her new baby get a wave goodbye as they go out to fend for themselves. Once again order is preserved.
The Donald needs to know this procedure before some aggressive interviewer again tries to get an actual answer out of him.
18
In the arguments about Pro-Life vs. Pro-Choice why is it that there is seldom a mention of intent. That is "is there or was there an intent by the woman to become pregnant and bear a child?" That is important.
And how many activists actually know the Guttmacher Institute statistics on pregnancy and abortion?
But the most important thing is that to make abortion illegal is to decree that pregnant women are to be classified as property of the state. An implication of this is that a woman's privacy would have to be trampled upon because doctors or clinics would have to report a woman's pregnancy and then the government would have to put in place guidelines to monitor the pregnancy to make sure it goes to term.
Unwanted pregnancies occur and abortion is a medical procedure that cannot be made illegal. The woman is a host. Both the male and female bodies and their computer systems are setup to bring about procreation.
One can work to educate and promote contraception and how conception occurs but to ban abortion is a terrorist act upon women made mostly by men. Defunding Planned Parenthood is another terrorist act.
Just think about it. We can't register dangerous semi-automatic hand guns and assault rifles but the wing nuts on the right seek to make it mandatory to register and monitor pregnant women and then track them down.
This is another example of how the GOP leadership and its under-informed legislators and zealots attack minority groups with impunity.
And how many activists actually know the Guttmacher Institute statistics on pregnancy and abortion?
But the most important thing is that to make abortion illegal is to decree that pregnant women are to be classified as property of the state. An implication of this is that a woman's privacy would have to be trampled upon because doctors or clinics would have to report a woman's pregnancy and then the government would have to put in place guidelines to monitor the pregnancy to make sure it goes to term.
Unwanted pregnancies occur and abortion is a medical procedure that cannot be made illegal. The woman is a host. Both the male and female bodies and their computer systems are setup to bring about procreation.
One can work to educate and promote contraception and how conception occurs but to ban abortion is a terrorist act upon women made mostly by men. Defunding Planned Parenthood is another terrorist act.
Just think about it. We can't register dangerous semi-automatic hand guns and assault rifles but the wing nuts on the right seek to make it mandatory to register and monitor pregnant women and then track them down.
This is another example of how the GOP leadership and its under-informed legislators and zealots attack minority groups with impunity.
43
Donald Trump's comment about punishing women for having abortions is outrageous and pro-life groups distanced themselves and condemned his words. I also think outrageous is the fact that Bernie Sanders said not too long ago that he wants to fund Planned Parenthood beyond the vast amounts it already receives. He is all for abortion and does not value life. The same for Hillary Clinton. They are strong proponents for abortion on demand, any time, any place, any where. Again this is outrageous and must made repeated often. They do not care how many lives are lost to this unspeakable act. This is pathetic.
4
I would never vote for Trump in a million years, but once again he strips away the veneer and the double-speak in so much of the gop's positions. No wonder he resonates with so many in spite of the overall idiocy of his views.
43
I just read the details of the case of the woman in Indiana. These details are an indictment of a system that denies access to abortion for a desperate woman who seeing no way out risks her life to end a pregnancy and in the end is tried and convicted for endangering the life of a 25 week old fetus and sentenced to 20 years in prison. This kind of legal horror would not occur in Canada in this day and age. I am appalled by the lack of compassion for this particular women, and by extension all women who find themselves alone, ostracized by their community and persecuted by the State. It is sickening.
57
Let's not forget the GOP is the party of "legitimate" rape so we cannot expect a thoughtful approach to a complex problem from Republicans. I wonder how these blowhards would handle rape or incest in the case of their wife, their daughter, their sister?
26
"fertilized eggs, embryos and fetuses" are not unborn children - they are fertilized eggs, embryos and fetuses, period. Language creates distortion. A fertilized egg has a potential for life "under the right circumstances". Why not say sperm and egg separately have the same potential for life "under the right circumstances"?
A woman who is forced to carry a pregnancy is a slave - make no doubt about it - that's the right word. And slaves have a right to protest their slavery and fight for freedom.
A woman who is forced to carry a pregnancy is a slave - make no doubt about it - that's the right word. And slaves have a right to protest their slavery and fight for freedom.
40
Why do so many people hold anti abortion stands, but oppose punishment? Well some hold these positions, but when push comes to shove will have an abortion anyway when their life styles are threatened by a pregnancy or they are rich and will have an abortion as a priviledge and would never accept punishment. The hypocrisy is astounding.
18
I tried to submit the following comment to the Gail Collins article about abortion and Donald Trump but did not make it in time. I will state it below.
Most of the girls and women seeking abortions at Planned Parenthood are Blacks and Hispanics and this is where they make the bulk of their money. Their aim is to go after minorities who are vulnerable and pretend to be their friend. Once they have had their abortions they are left to fend for themselves. They do not care what happens to the victims after they leave the facilities. We must educate them to this very important fact. The pro-life folks are their for them before and after the birth of the babies and all they need to do is ask.
Most of the girls and women seeking abortions at Planned Parenthood are Blacks and Hispanics and this is where they make the bulk of their money. Their aim is to go after minorities who are vulnerable and pretend to be their friend. Once they have had their abortions they are left to fend for themselves. They do not care what happens to the victims after they leave the facilities. We must educate them to this very important fact. The pro-life folks are their for them before and after the birth of the babies and all they need to do is ask.
2
Excellent column, every paragraph. And yes, Trump, in his sudden search for the politically correct answer to the insistent questioning of Chris Mathews, said something logical, thinking this is what he should say as a "pro-life" candidate, a role still quite new for him. Nobody briefed him on the women-are-victims-because-they-can't-think-for-themselves part of the proper position, ironic since Trump has so little respect for them in general. Too bad for him he is his own advisor. Before Roe v Wade ( I, like Trump, am old enough to remember,) the ubiquitous if not universal insignia of the reproductive rights movement was the coat hanger. Women were truly the victims of the laws the GOP wants to revive.
16
Although it is not the “point” of this op-ed piece, the “If abortion is murder... “ must be the major premise of anyone who wants to punish abortion, or perhaps even just oppose it. Whether an anti-abortion position comes from the Bible’s “thou shalt not kill,” or from some other opposition to killing, the concept of “murder” rests on a killing. Although most jurisdictions in this country have laws prohibiting murder, those laws generally designate degrees of murder and provide for exceptions when a killing is somehow or another justified by the culture of the jurisdiction having the law. Few, if any, murder statutes specifically mention abortion.
Murder laws have not really faced the question of when life “begins,“ but rather rely on generally accepted understanding of who should be protected from killing. Even with continuing efforts by some to impose liability, whether criminal or civil, on those who injure the unborn or prevent their birth, we generally have not, as a culture and society, included actions toward the unborn in our criminal “murder” statues.
Without even getting to Roe v. Wade, pro-life advocates should not impose a “murder burden” on those holding pro-choice beliefs, unless and until society takes appropriate legal steps to criminalize abortion and call it murder.
Murder laws have not really faced the question of when life “begins,“ but rather rely on generally accepted understanding of who should be protected from killing. Even with continuing efforts by some to impose liability, whether criminal or civil, on those who injure the unborn or prevent their birth, we generally have not, as a culture and society, included actions toward the unborn in our criminal “murder” statues.
Without even getting to Roe v. Wade, pro-life advocates should not impose a “murder burden” on those holding pro-choice beliefs, unless and until society takes appropriate legal steps to criminalize abortion and call it murder.
4
Dare I point out that if only men could become pregnant, abortion would be legal from the get-go.
Men have made a world where they are allowed to control their own destiny -- and women's. How's that working? Not so great.
Let's see what kind of world results when women are allowed to control their own destiny. I predict far fewer wars -- and far less suffering by children brought into this world.
Men have made a world where they are allowed to control their own destiny -- and women's. How's that working? Not so great.
Let's see what kind of world results when women are allowed to control their own destiny. I predict far fewer wars -- and far less suffering by children brought into this world.
24
A fact that is overlooked by many is that not all pregnancies result in the birth of a live, healthy baby. I am sure we all know women who suffered a spontaneous miscarriage, or whose child was stillborn or died within hours of birth. This happens much less among women who had access to a fully qualified OBGYN physician. Unfortunately, not all women have this access. Especially women living in rural areas or who have no medical insurance.
10
What's missing from this discussion is the acknowledgement that homo sapiens are not hermaphroditic. Where there is a pregnant woman, there is also a man nearby, without whom there would be no pregnancy. The anti-abortion crowd is either missing the big picture, or consciously ignoring it. Want to outlaw abortion? Penalize the woman for making "poor choices" and make her bear the child, regardless of her desires or ability to do so?
OK, then (for the sake of argument only). But then, let's cast a broader net for the sake of consistency. Requiring women to bear unwanted children should also mean requiring the male to share in the cost and effort of raising the child. Why should the woman be stuck with all the burdens when the male was/is equally responsible for the pregnancy?
Do we hear Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Santorum, Huckabee, Perry, Ryan or Kasich advocating throwing male sexual partners into jail if they don't show up and own up? HA! Of course not. Because this has NEVER been about "right" and "wrong," it's been about preserving the time-honored tradition of men ordering women around. One which too many so-called Bronze-Age religions have baked into their "theology." (Should we re-name that He-ology?)
When the self-styled "pro-lifers" start picketing outside the home or workplace of the deadbeat boyfriend, I'll take them more seriously. Which means I'll never have to take them seriously. Sakes alive, they are an ignorant and repugnant lot.
OK, then (for the sake of argument only). But then, let's cast a broader net for the sake of consistency. Requiring women to bear unwanted children should also mean requiring the male to share in the cost and effort of raising the child. Why should the woman be stuck with all the burdens when the male was/is equally responsible for the pregnancy?
Do we hear Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Santorum, Huckabee, Perry, Ryan or Kasich advocating throwing male sexual partners into jail if they don't show up and own up? HA! Of course not. Because this has NEVER been about "right" and "wrong," it's been about preserving the time-honored tradition of men ordering women around. One which too many so-called Bronze-Age religions have baked into their "theology." (Should we re-name that He-ology?)
When the self-styled "pro-lifers" start picketing outside the home or workplace of the deadbeat boyfriend, I'll take them more seriously. Which means I'll never have to take them seriously. Sakes alive, they are an ignorant and repugnant lot.
38
Great comment, Alexander! (He-ology! Ha.)
8
The guy who drives the get away car when a robbery involves a murder is often found guilty of murder. Why shouldn't the man (or boy) who assists in the unwanted pregnancy be an accessory to murder. Of course this is stupid, but it is no more stupid than most of the stances taken by the "pro life" movement. Most of the pro lifers that I have encountered are against sex education, food stamps, health care for the poor, welfare, medicaid, equal pay and anything else that might help a woman or family to decide that they could prevent or afford an unplanned child. If the pro lifers would worry about the born children as much as the pre-born then maybe we could make some progress toward reducing the demand for abortions.
26
The issue of abortion has always been a means by which the right wing motivates their base to vote and to vote against their own economic interests. The Republican elites are not against abortion and their children of course have them too, but they can afford to send them to wherever is necessary to have the "issue" fixed. As proof of this, just remember from 2001-2007 when the Republicans held the House, Senate, Presidency and the Supreme Court that there was no action taken against it. No, the Republican's were way to busy preparing tax cuts for the very wealthy and for starting a war from which they would profit from politically and economically, and cost the nation trillions of dollars - borrowed dollars. For many liberals, their views have always seemed hypocritical because they want to exercise capital punishment and oppose abortion on religious grounds. The fact is they care not about life which allows them to support capital punishment, and oppose abortion because they want to punish the "poor" women who had sex and for whatever reason, got pregnant. The fact that they care not for the child is demonstrated by their resolve to oppose all social spending for the child or for prevention via Planned Parenthood. Unfortunately, too many Americans are easily manipulated by both an oligarchy trying to maintain their political power and by a Church trying to increase it's ranks. Freedom, which is what a women's choice represents, is the last thing any of these people want.
15
The people who are committed to preventing women from having control over their uteruses clearly value an embryo more than the pregnant woman and more than the infant after delivery. They especially place the value of a male fetus above that of the pregnant woman. In debating abortion issues, the men in the Mass. legislature nearly always referred to the fetus as "he."
Nowhere else in the law are parents required by state power to risk their lives for their offspring, although we might respect them for doing so. Yet pregnancy always carries a risk of serious complications or death. Those who support compulsory pregnancy should explain how they arrive at the idea that the fetus' interests must always be placed above those of the mother, on penalty of legal sanctions. Is it because the mother is seen as hopelessly depraved because she had sex, while the fetus is innocent? Is it because the fetus is assumed to be the property of the father? Why is the woman of no account at all?
Nowhere else in the law are parents required by state power to risk their lives for their offspring, although we might respect them for doing so. Yet pregnancy always carries a risk of serious complications or death. Those who support compulsory pregnancy should explain how they arrive at the idea that the fetus' interests must always be placed above those of the mother, on penalty of legal sanctions. Is it because the mother is seen as hopelessly depraved because she had sex, while the fetus is innocent? Is it because the fetus is assumed to be the property of the father? Why is the woman of no account at all?
14
IMO, the essence of the abortion issue is in the question, "When does life actually begin?" The so-called pro-life movement (so-called because it seems okay to murder in other instances) insists that this must be at conception, that there is something inherently sacred about the meeting of a sperm and ovary. I am considered a deeply religious person by my community, yet I believe differently.
Allow me to switch to the other side of the life-play: Death. Almost every religion I am aware of acknowledges a spiritual component to this thing called "life". At death, the physical is left behind, and the spiritual component leaves and goes wherever (Heaven, Reincarnation...who knows?). My point is that religions acknowledge that death occurs when the spiritual component leaves the physical. Life must therefore begin when the spiritual component enters the physical. And please tell me, who knows this?
Catholics believe that the soul enters at conception. Hindus believe the soul enters toward the end of pregnancy. This issue must be resolved within the framework of a deeply personal, conscious decision (which may or may not include a religious belief). This decision must lie with the individual.
Personally, I DO believe in the sacredness of life, and that includes all the aspects of bringing a child into the world. It should be planned for, prayed/meditated for. (Please don't tell me that a rape is sacred.)
Allow me to switch to the other side of the life-play: Death. Almost every religion I am aware of acknowledges a spiritual component to this thing called "life". At death, the physical is left behind, and the spiritual component leaves and goes wherever (Heaven, Reincarnation...who knows?). My point is that religions acknowledge that death occurs when the spiritual component leaves the physical. Life must therefore begin when the spiritual component enters the physical. And please tell me, who knows this?
Catholics believe that the soul enters at conception. Hindus believe the soul enters toward the end of pregnancy. This issue must be resolved within the framework of a deeply personal, conscious decision (which may or may not include a religious belief). This decision must lie with the individual.
Personally, I DO believe in the sacredness of life, and that includes all the aspects of bringing a child into the world. It should be planned for, prayed/meditated for. (Please don't tell me that a rape is sacred.)
7
Why would I be charged with double murder if I kill a pregnant woman at 18 weeks, but a mother and Doctor aren't?
Could a pro-abortionist please explain this using some justification OTHER THAN 'one child is WANTED is while the other ISN'T'?
I'm about to drive my 3.5 and 1.5 year old children to town. I assure you: they are more dependent on my wife and I than they were at 42 weeks. Why then, can't I legally kill them if I lose my job and can't afford to care for them? Could a pro-abortionist please explain this using an argument OTHER THAN 'it is too personal to kill someone if you can see their face'?
Could a pro-abortionist please explain this using some justification OTHER THAN 'one child is WANTED is while the other ISN'T'?
I'm about to drive my 3.5 and 1.5 year old children to town. I assure you: they are more dependent on my wife and I than they were at 42 weeks. Why then, can't I legally kill them if I lose my job and can't afford to care for them? Could a pro-abortionist please explain this using an argument OTHER THAN 'it is too personal to kill someone if you can see their face'?
4
What most Anti-Choice advocates forget is that Roe V Wade was about Privacy.
You know that thing you desire when you are alone with someone you love or making a decision, ANY decision, that is no one else's business except you and who that decision affects? You have been bamboozled by the GOP to be a pawn in their political gain. If not for the GOP mobilizing the Anti-Choice forces no GOP Candidate for President since Nixon would have won a first term. Not one.
You know that thing you desire when you are alone with someone you love or making a decision, ANY decision, that is no one else's business except you and who that decision affects? You have been bamboozled by the GOP to be a pawn in their political gain. If not for the GOP mobilizing the Anti-Choice forces no GOP Candidate for President since Nixon would have won a first term. Not one.
53
Thank you.
I did not know of the cases of Purvi Patel, Anna Yocca or Jennifer Whalen.
I have not read all the comments but I would like someone from the anti-choice camp to explain how those cases are distinguishable from their position.
I did not know of the cases of Purvi Patel, Anna Yocca or Jennifer Whalen.
I have not read all the comments but I would like someone from the anti-choice camp to explain how those cases are distinguishable from their position.
5
The Christian right's capacity for hypocrisy and self deception knows no bounds.
12
Is it not punishment enough just to have an abortion?
9
Technically the way birth control pills work is to prevent the FERTILIZED EGG from implanting in the uterus where it can continue to grow and be nourished. So if one considers life to begin at conception/fertilization, then all women using birth control pills or other devices, or drugs to prevent implantation are also "guilty" of self abortion.
To be consistent then the "pro lifers" must then not use any form of birth control themselves other than condoms or timing.
Also to be consistent the "pro lifers" must seek to ban the use of birth control pills, iuds and other devices. This won't be done because it would be to politically unpopular.
I fully agree with the author. If Trump, Kasich, Cruz, really have the conviction of their beliefs then they should go after the woman who hired the hitman doctor, and they should seek to also ban birth control pills, iuds, etc. that prevent implantation of the fertilized egg. They don't truly have the courage to completely go where logically their convictions should lead them.
To be consistent then the "pro lifers" must then not use any form of birth control themselves other than condoms or timing.
Also to be consistent the "pro lifers" must seek to ban the use of birth control pills, iuds and other devices. This won't be done because it would be to politically unpopular.
I fully agree with the author. If Trump, Kasich, Cruz, really have the conviction of their beliefs then they should go after the woman who hired the hitman doctor, and they should seek to also ban birth control pills, iuds, etc. that prevent implantation of the fertilized egg. They don't truly have the courage to completely go where logically their convictions should lead them.
11
Well, it's just one more example; Trump's followers overwhelmingly say they like him 'because he tells it like it is" He's holding up a mirror. How do you like what you see?
8
I am finding that the constant flaunting of self righteous, radical right, government as enforcer of religious - and misogynist views - too much to keep reading. The verbal and legal attacks are unrelenting: are some of our so called leaders so far away in their hearts from the men in the Sharia dominated countries who would stone us or murder us for crossing the lines they set?
17
Failure to enforce "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" on these oath-breakers who give us faith-based laws has tainted the entire post WW II history of the US.
10
The Leftist aka Liberal view that they are particularly adept at seeing into the motives, thoughts, emotions, feelings and unspoken aims of those they disagree with needs to be evaluated as it is a universal view of all such people.
Is it possible the facts just do not support their position and this is their common defense mechanism otherwise known as 'changing the subject'? They should be educated that it is not a logical form of argument!
Is it possible the facts just do not support their position and this is their common defense mechanism otherwise known as 'changing the subject'? They should be educated that it is not a logical form of argument!
Women as victims when they choose not to be pregnant? Now THAT is funny. Women I know who have had abortions - about one in three - were relieved. They chose not to carry a particular cluster of cells at that time in their lives. They were created as women and had the inalienable right to choose what they did with their bodies. Smart women. Radical religionists can't stand that idea - girls and women making their own choices on how to live their lives. Every thinking woman and man in America MUST DEMAND that an Equal Rights Amendment to OUR United States Constitution be added that says, "No law shall be passed in America that discriminates based on gender." WE must stop these constant attacks on women's inalienable rights to choose what they do with their own bodies.
25
I think if we were to eliminate the "undue burden" clause that followed Row vs Wade, this whole republican witch hunt could be put to rest.
5
Thank you Katha, your perspective is always enlightening.
Being a man, I probably shouldn't even comment on this but here are some of the things I've heard from men:
It's not my fault, she's the one who got pregnant. It's her problem.
I hate prophylactics, why can't she just take a pill?
Why can't she just get rid of it?
I know I don't have a job or any money and I drink too much and live in my parents basement but shouldn't it be my choice too?
Even though the church forbids birth control that doesn't mean you should be breeding like rabbits.
Why should men have any say on whether or not a woman decides to end a pregnancy? Most men don't seem to have a clue about the challenges a woman has to face in just being a woman. Most men don't seem to even want to hear about it.
Cruz and Kasich are nauseating and it's hard to take Trump seriously about anything.
Being a man, I probably shouldn't even comment on this but here are some of the things I've heard from men:
It's not my fault, she's the one who got pregnant. It's her problem.
I hate prophylactics, why can't she just take a pill?
Why can't she just get rid of it?
I know I don't have a job or any money and I drink too much and live in my parents basement but shouldn't it be my choice too?
Even though the church forbids birth control that doesn't mean you should be breeding like rabbits.
Why should men have any say on whether or not a woman decides to end a pregnancy? Most men don't seem to have a clue about the challenges a woman has to face in just being a woman. Most men don't seem to even want to hear about it.
Cruz and Kasich are nauseating and it's hard to take Trump seriously about anything.
13
Trump is right for once, the men shouldn't be punished.
Let's use Trump's logic here (think pretzel). Women invest a lot of energy in the egg while men make hundreds of thousands of sperm. Women launch one of these large cells invested with lots of effort down the fallopian tube every month (and this causes Trump lots of grief, esp. when it comes to one woman on Fox News) while men launch these things anywhere and everywhere without a care, as fast as you can say "huh?" the little things are off swimming and so is the man who launched them. Plus, women get stuck with the results for almost a year inside them but men just make another million or so and they're gone, and on top of that women have to feed and care and teach the offspring for years after launching that egg, but men go out and run down meat or get in fights with the neighbors or just stand around with the other men and punch each other's shoulders. Some of them ferment something and get drunk, sure, but who remembers that?
And what do the women do then? They're digging up tubers and collecting nuts to store for winter (so they can feed that noisy brat) or they're grinding meal. How important is that?
So why should men be blamed? They're not stuck with that brat! Or we could do what some archeologists thought even more primitive humans practiced, and that's keep the woman in a cave and when she emerges 9 months later she leads the men to believe that it was magic, getting that child, so be in awe!
Let's use Trump's logic here (think pretzel). Women invest a lot of energy in the egg while men make hundreds of thousands of sperm. Women launch one of these large cells invested with lots of effort down the fallopian tube every month (and this causes Trump lots of grief, esp. when it comes to one woman on Fox News) while men launch these things anywhere and everywhere without a care, as fast as you can say "huh?" the little things are off swimming and so is the man who launched them. Plus, women get stuck with the results for almost a year inside them but men just make another million or so and they're gone, and on top of that women have to feed and care and teach the offspring for years after launching that egg, but men go out and run down meat or get in fights with the neighbors or just stand around with the other men and punch each other's shoulders. Some of them ferment something and get drunk, sure, but who remembers that?
And what do the women do then? They're digging up tubers and collecting nuts to store for winter (so they can feed that noisy brat) or they're grinding meal. How important is that?
So why should men be blamed? They're not stuck with that brat! Or we could do what some archeologists thought even more primitive humans practiced, and that's keep the woman in a cave and when she emerges 9 months later she leads the men to believe that it was magic, getting that child, so be in awe!
3
Many of the religions of the world have taboos that criminalize and punish sexual behaviors. Most of these practices, for example, the imagined reward of sexual pleasure after death for martyrdom or criminalizing a sexual experience between two children if one of them is over 18 and the other is not, are remnants of the primitive origins of human society. These social norms are behavioral variants of taboos within social groups similar to the alpha baboon within a troop of baboons.
That every candidate for president in one party has taken up the issue of abortion as if these primitive human taboos require punishment is evidence for the failure of public education and the real danger that faces the world when the best armed and most powerful nation in the history of the world goes bonkers over something as essential to human existence as sexuality. Just how do they imagine we are different from the jihadists of ISIS with their sex slaves? Both behaviors follow from religious values resulting from the primitive origins of human society.
That every candidate for president in one party has taken up the issue of abortion as if these primitive human taboos require punishment is evidence for the failure of public education and the real danger that faces the world when the best armed and most powerful nation in the history of the world goes bonkers over something as essential to human existence as sexuality. Just how do they imagine we are different from the jihadists of ISIS with their sex slaves? Both behaviors follow from religious values resulting from the primitive origins of human society.
4
We are spending a lot of time discussing what Mom should do about her baby (to be or not to be that s the question), in fact a lot more than gun control or white police shooting black kids. It seems we love to talk about women and how to set them straight.
7
Why is it still a surprise that Donald Trump sound like Republicans? He says what they say on war, taxes, immigration, Islam, gays, foreign policy and on abortion. If he sounds confused, it's only because the Republican position doesn't make sense. Hearing other GOP candidates and party leaders scrambling for distance from the logical conclusion of their policies is risible.
8
National Advocates for Pregnant Women has been advocating against fetal rights laws that have lead to jailing women all over the nation. The anti-abortion spokesmen and women are trying to have it both ways. They want to control and punish women, but not be held accountable.
7
I think one of the reasons anti-choice supporters were so bothered by Trump suggesting that women should be punished for having an abortion is because it could allow for passage of laws where a man could be punished for being an accessory to a crime. If a woman gets an abortion because she was impregnated by a man then it only stands to reason that the man that impregnated her, thus causing her to seek an abortion, should also be "punished". Perhaps laws could be passed forcing men to wear condoms or risk being arrested for attempted pregnancy, (leading to the risk of commiting an abortion). Since abortion is murder, being an accessory should warrant a pretty stiff penalty.
9
That's a stretch, unless the man actively helped the woman to procure the illegal abortion. Then, logically, he would be an accessory to "murder."
From a biological perspective, the primary mission of an organism is to reproduce. Nature takes its course, even many of the most responsible and disciplined will find themselves with an unintended pregnancy. Government should not be in the business of punishing people for being being hard wired with the facts of life.
8
Until we as a people decide, and accept the decision of when human life begins, this argument will continue for a long, long time. Alas, I think it will be for a long, long time.
2
It has been decided in Roe vs Wade. Republicans just don't like the answer. Similarly as they have claimed Pres. Obama isn't our "real" president.
9
Peter, you are a man. Ergo, your opinion on the topic has about 10% validity. My view as a woman (who BTW never had an abortion and most likely never would have) is far more valid than yours. And here it is: "We the people" do not get to decide what a woman does with her own body. As a grown up person, only she will deal with whatever consequences follow: relief, celebration, mourning, regrets. Her, only her-- not you, not me, not "we the people."
8
Anti-choicers claim that they want to *prevent* abortions. When presented with real, tested and proven ways to reduce the number of abortions , they reject such methods en masse. Why? Because those methods reduce abortions by reducing the number of unwanted conceptions which result from the sex that continues to be had. They don’t want to reduce abortions by THOSE methods. That’s not the point. Those methods only reduce abortions by causing women to less often wish to have abortions and if they don’t want to have abortions they aren’t permitted to have, then it doesn’t punish them for having sex under unauthorized circumstances in the first place. It doesn’t control them. It doesn’t dominate them. It doesn’t show them that someone else is in charge of their lives. That’s the real purpose. Keep pushing your way through the lies and the excuses; keep questioning WHY they don’t follow through on their commitment to “life” when it’s outside the womb; keep asking WHY they don’t want to reduce the number of unborn babies who are killed by the methods which are proven to work and you get at the truth: It’s not good enough to reduce abortions by giving women a way to have sex without conceiving. Because those methods do not take away their choices, and that makes them worthless in the eyes of “pro-lifers.” Their real purposes are far different and for those, a baby loses its purpose as soon as it is no longer a chain to bind its mother to an unwanted servitude.
12
While he seems to shoot from the mouth he is also quick to reholster his tongue. He is in this as a piqued response to the President, but even more so for the essentially unlimited advertising he has received.
The word "Trump" with its' capitalization will join every dictionary published for the next 100 years and longer.
He can and may become the nominee of his nominal political party but he stands the same chance of winning as the proverbial snowball in another unearthly realm outside our political universe.
He will laugh every time he sees another bank statement, save every comment and frame every cartoon even if he has to build a special wing to display it all.
As Mel Brooks noted about another earlier entrepreneur he has "a winning item, a hit" and it hasn't taken six men, each with a point running together to make it.
The word "Trump" with its' capitalization will join every dictionary published for the next 100 years and longer.
He can and may become the nominee of his nominal political party but he stands the same chance of winning as the proverbial snowball in another unearthly realm outside our political universe.
He will laugh every time he sees another bank statement, save every comment and frame every cartoon even if he has to build a special wing to display it all.
As Mel Brooks noted about another earlier entrepreneur he has "a winning item, a hit" and it hasn't taken six men, each with a point running together to make it.
2
I'm no fan of Mr. Trump and I am not now or ever have been a member of the Republican Party.
Mr. Trump's statement, absurd as it is, is the logical consequence of a certain pro-birth "ethic." What positions do Randal Terry and company hold? According to them it is always murder, a capital crime. Cogito ergo or as himself, the real Mikado, puts it:
My object all sublime
I shall achieve in time —
To let the punishment fit the crime...
The reaction merely demonstrates the hypocracy of the self-styled pro "life" movement as an attach on the access of poor women to reproductive health services as they will continue to have dilation and curettage procedures (read abortions) and their daughters' acne will be treated with oral contraceptives (certainly not because they are sexually active).
Mr. Trump's statement, absurd as it is, is the logical consequence of a certain pro-birth "ethic." What positions do Randal Terry and company hold? According to them it is always murder, a capital crime. Cogito ergo or as himself, the real Mikado, puts it:
My object all sublime
I shall achieve in time —
To let the punishment fit the crime...
The reaction merely demonstrates the hypocracy of the self-styled pro "life" movement as an attach on the access of poor women to reproductive health services as they will continue to have dilation and curettage procedures (read abortions) and their daughters' acne will be treated with oral contraceptives (certainly not because they are sexually active).
7
The Pro-Life “abortion is murder” argument collapses on itself. If an induced abortion is murder, then a spontaneous abortion or miscarriage would be considered a death. But this is not the case.
After enduring miscarriages in Roman Catholic hospitals, we realized that after Dilation and Evacuation procedures, our miscarried tissue went into the hospital’s medical waste receptacle instead of a casket or urn. We observed that “Pro-Life” churches and their institutions do not systematically recognize a fetus as a person. They do not baptize a fetus as they would a child. They do not regularly offer funeral services, masses, burials or other related rites. There are no parish records created when conception occurs.
“Pro-life” silence about miscarriage unveils the fallacy on which they stand. “Pro-life” treatment of the 40-60% of pregnancies that end in “spontaneous abortion” supports the conclusion that in Pro-Life eyes, a death did not occur. Yet they noisily insist that in an “induced abortion” a living person is murdered.
If they seriously believe that a fetus is a child, we would see this in the records of their parishes and hospitals, their care for miscarried tissue, and in their advocacy for new procedures in Bureaus of Vital Statistics. Their inactions speak louder than their words. In the shadows of the silence regarding spontaneous abortion, their argument against induced abortion rings false.
After enduring miscarriages in Roman Catholic hospitals, we realized that after Dilation and Evacuation procedures, our miscarried tissue went into the hospital’s medical waste receptacle instead of a casket or urn. We observed that “Pro-Life” churches and their institutions do not systematically recognize a fetus as a person. They do not baptize a fetus as they would a child. They do not regularly offer funeral services, masses, burials or other related rites. There are no parish records created when conception occurs.
“Pro-life” silence about miscarriage unveils the fallacy on which they stand. “Pro-life” treatment of the 40-60% of pregnancies that end in “spontaneous abortion” supports the conclusion that in Pro-Life eyes, a death did not occur. Yet they noisily insist that in an “induced abortion” a living person is murdered.
If they seriously believe that a fetus is a child, we would see this in the records of their parishes and hospitals, their care for miscarried tissue, and in their advocacy for new procedures in Bureaus of Vital Statistics. Their inactions speak louder than their words. In the shadows of the silence regarding spontaneous abortion, their argument against induced abortion rings false.
31
Thank you for taking this to the next level. Many people do not really understand that Trump merely stated what all the right to lifers, including Kasich and Cruz, really believe but are careful to not express publicly. Afterall, how many doctors and clinics have been targeted through websites and books specifically calling for killing. We only have to look at the latest terrorist killings of folks in Colorado Springs to understand how insidious and disgusting this really is.
90
If women who abort pregnancies are deserving of punishment, are not the men equally deserving of penalty. If unmarried females are mandated to carry a fetus to term, should not the male be required to pay a fair share of the medical/hospital costs for delivery and the subsequent child care and support. All blame, embarrassment and punishment for abortion is focused on the woman, and no one asks if the man bears any responsibility or should share any of the consequences. Perhaps the conversation would change if both sexes were held accountable for their actions and shared responsibilty for the choices that follow.
80
Gail Collins is a contemporary Diogenes. She found an honest anti-choice pastor.
To wit: ' "You never blame the woman, you paint her as a victim.” said Robert Jeffress, a Dallas pastor and Trump supporter who was one of the very, very few anti-abortion public figures who didn’t cringe and demand that Trump walk back his comments. “That conservative orthodoxy has been born out of political expediency rather than logic.” '
Other conservative orthodoxies are born out of political expediency too. Could you imagine a spokesperson for the Little Sisters saying, "We oppose contraception and want to do everything in our power to prevent women from getting it?" Of course not. Instead, they talk about religious freedom. Or, can you imagine store owners saying, "I really detest the LGBT community and I don't want any of them in my place of business?" No. Instead, they talk about freedom of religion.
The right is panicked by Scalia's death because they know they had an activist judge on the bench who would have given credence to "political expediency" in cases involving abortion, contraception and rights for people in the LGBT community.
To wit: ' "You never blame the woman, you paint her as a victim.” said Robert Jeffress, a Dallas pastor and Trump supporter who was one of the very, very few anti-abortion public figures who didn’t cringe and demand that Trump walk back his comments. “That conservative orthodoxy has been born out of political expediency rather than logic.” '
Other conservative orthodoxies are born out of political expediency too. Could you imagine a spokesperson for the Little Sisters saying, "We oppose contraception and want to do everything in our power to prevent women from getting it?" Of course not. Instead, they talk about religious freedom. Or, can you imagine store owners saying, "I really detest the LGBT community and I don't want any of them in my place of business?" No. Instead, they talk about freedom of religion.
The right is panicked by Scalia's death because they know they had an activist judge on the bench who would have given credence to "political expediency" in cases involving abortion, contraception and rights for people in the LGBT community.
10
Since so many men believe they have a God given veto right over a woman's decisions re her body, why don't women - a majority in this country - turn the equation around and require all men at age 18 to have vasectomies that can only be reversed with a female sexual partner's permission? No more unwanted babies and men would finally understand how it feels to have another human being determine their reproductive choices. It's no more ludicrous a proposal than allowing a man to tell a rape or incest victim that she must carry the criminal's child to term.
26
The real truth is that the GOP has zero interest in making abortion illegal. The fetus is a great fundraising tool. Plus the leaders, mostly men, of "pro-life" movement are getting rich too.
2
The estimate is that one in three women have had abortions. We are your sisters, wives, mothers, teachers, professionals, daughters, neighbors, in fact we are all someone you know. Do you propose to jail all of us? Shun us? The fact is that birth control fails. I see no proposals for help for people with children. Our country is woefully neglect in health care, maternity leave, childcare. All I see is punishment for women for their sexuality.
13
Trump just spoke the anti-abortion party line. IF Abortion is deemed to be murder, then it follows that the woman is the mastermind of the crime and the attending doctor a guilty co-conspirator accomplice. Every family member who weighed in on the decision is an accessory to murder 1 as would be each of the hospital staffers including the hospital's Director who would be brought up on charges akin to Josef Mengele. Listen to Rachel Maddow on this subject. Listen to Chris Mattews press for answers. Others in the media won't touch it and no one on the anti-abortion platform will speak of the penalties for violating this law. It is unenforceable because it is ultimately unwieldy not to mention unethical and immoral. The great Constitutional Scholar R.L. Cord addressed this conflict in many lectures in the 80's and it formed key language in his landmark citations in Roe v. Wade.
If we take the pro life stance to its absolutist conclusion, we have to accept that we do not know the exact moment a zygote becomes a human being and must thus accept the moment of conception as the beginning of life, accept that to take this life is murder, and accept that all parties to the murder must be held criminally and morally responsible.
The Catholic doctrine goes so far as to declare that contraception of any kind, including the rhythm method, is an affront to God's law. Every sperm is sacred. Nothing must stand in the way of God's plan for us - to be fruitful and multiply and inhabit the earth until it is completely full.
Thou shalt not kill. First commandment. No equivocation there, yet we kill everyday. Every one of us. Even vegans eat microscopic bugs with their rice. We eat things that may or may not be sentient. We don't know. We're only human and have no idea what other life forms might be inhabiting this planet for whatever purpose.
It's high time to evolve out of the dark ages where a fictitious man in the sky informs how we live and think. We are following him to our demise and our doom. Seven and half billion people on this planet because we are so precious in his eye? Why isn't he taking better care of us then?
The Catholic doctrine goes so far as to declare that contraception of any kind, including the rhythm method, is an affront to God's law. Every sperm is sacred. Nothing must stand in the way of God's plan for us - to be fruitful and multiply and inhabit the earth until it is completely full.
Thou shalt not kill. First commandment. No equivocation there, yet we kill everyday. Every one of us. Even vegans eat microscopic bugs with their rice. We eat things that may or may not be sentient. We don't know. We're only human and have no idea what other life forms might be inhabiting this planet for whatever purpose.
It's high time to evolve out of the dark ages where a fictitious man in the sky informs how we live and think. We are following him to our demise and our doom. Seven and half billion people on this planet because we are so precious in his eye? Why isn't he taking better care of us then?
8
Much has been said and done on this issue, and here are my two cents.
- We need to stop politicizing abortion.
- Phenomenologically speaking (for what it is), abortion is taking of life of a potential person. Look at ultrasound pics of a 6 week-old foetus. But 'Murder' has social, legal elements that don't quite apply here - unborn has no separate, personal identity yet.
- Pro-abortion side has to accept that abortion is often used as a form of birth control, after conception, for a variety of reasons, including health of mother, birth defects and just plain carelessness about sexual activity and contraception. They need to strive hard to minimize the ladt type, as much as possible, with due respect to dignity of individuals and society.
- Women have tetminated pregnancies for millenia and will continue to do so, somehow or other. We need to make it only the very last and safe option for them.
- Abortion is a very intensely personal choice for a woman, and quite often for the man involved in it also, and it is best left to them to make that choice, with the optional counsel of their family and friends.
- As a society, we need to minimize abortions, and do so through education and non-political, non-religious, social awakening.
- We need to stop politicizing abortion.
- Phenomenologically speaking (for what it is), abortion is taking of life of a potential person. Look at ultrasound pics of a 6 week-old foetus. But 'Murder' has social, legal elements that don't quite apply here - unborn has no separate, personal identity yet.
- Pro-abortion side has to accept that abortion is often used as a form of birth control, after conception, for a variety of reasons, including health of mother, birth defects and just plain carelessness about sexual activity and contraception. They need to strive hard to minimize the ladt type, as much as possible, with due respect to dignity of individuals and society.
- Women have tetminated pregnancies for millenia and will continue to do so, somehow or other. We need to make it only the very last and safe option for them.
- Abortion is a very intensely personal choice for a woman, and quite often for the man involved in it also, and it is best left to them to make that choice, with the optional counsel of their family and friends.
- As a society, we need to minimize abortions, and do so through education and non-political, non-religious, social awakening.
2
Katha Pollitt. one of the strongest and most honest pro-choice advocates, is refreshingly honest and cuts through all the muddled thinking and heated rhetoric.
IF - please note well those capital letters - if, *for the sake of the argument* and in a good-faith effort to understand the pro-life position, we posit that an individual human life begins at conception, then abortion is murder. You are not allowed to kill your newborn, or five-year-old, because it is a product of rape, or you are clinically depressed or poor or just don't want it for some reason. You are not allowed to argue that because God, or nature, also kills children (just as many or even most pregnancies end naturally in spontaneous abortion without human intervention), you therefore have a right to kill your newborn or toddler or for that matter adolescent or adult offspring. IF a foetus is morally and legally equivalent to a born human life, age doesn't matter. 15 weeks or 15 years, it'd still be murder.
I'm amazed Pollitt can get away with writing this! I've posted many comments to this effect in the NYT and generally gotten vitriol for insisting on introducing logic in all the screaming.
Gestation is a process, but the law requires drawing bright lines, a point at which it's either a 'baby' or it is not. IF it is a baby from the get-go, abortion is murder. How fortunate for women, then, that it's not a baby - at best, a potential one - at least until it reaches a point of viability outside the womb.
IF - please note well those capital letters - if, *for the sake of the argument* and in a good-faith effort to understand the pro-life position, we posit that an individual human life begins at conception, then abortion is murder. You are not allowed to kill your newborn, or five-year-old, because it is a product of rape, or you are clinically depressed or poor or just don't want it for some reason. You are not allowed to argue that because God, or nature, also kills children (just as many or even most pregnancies end naturally in spontaneous abortion without human intervention), you therefore have a right to kill your newborn or toddler or for that matter adolescent or adult offspring. IF a foetus is morally and legally equivalent to a born human life, age doesn't matter. 15 weeks or 15 years, it'd still be murder.
I'm amazed Pollitt can get away with writing this! I've posted many comments to this effect in the NYT and generally gotten vitriol for insisting on introducing logic in all the screaming.
Gestation is a process, but the law requires drawing bright lines, a point at which it's either a 'baby' or it is not. IF it is a baby from the get-go, abortion is murder. How fortunate for women, then, that it's not a baby - at best, a potential one - at least until it reaches a point of viability outside the womb.
9
Trump's final landing position of let the states decide is another way of saying let conservative states force poor women into the position of seeking illegal abortion at the hands of someone who is not qualified and could end up killing them and the baby. Now those states and politicians speaking in the name of their citizens would be complicit in murder, but would get no punishment. That would be a miscarriage of justice.
5
Trump would be dangerous as president. But why does it take someone like him, saying something shocking like this, for the media to suddenly become interested in examining the basic falsehoods that underpin the shop-worn left/right narrative? You've allowed candidates to get away with spewing these banal and misleading narratives for decades. Trump's comments on abortion - along with similar "gaffes" on foreign policy, health care, immigration, trade - are only surprising to the chattering classes in that they don't conform. But they probably won't impact Trump's support, because voters are so unbelievably tired of being force fed the same vapid trash every day they can't help but be attracted to the one guy who seems oblivious to it. Please do a better job holding all of our officials to account, and people like Trump won't gain currency in the first place.
2
Not surprisingly, Donald Trump is wrong. Everyone jumping on board to confirm his incorrect logic is also wrong.
Doctors are not obligated to do what their patients request. They are not "hired" to perform a specified task.
Doctors are charged with the responsibility of making a medically sound diagnosis and offering treatments, supported by evidence, to treat the diagnosed illness. In doing so, they are bound by the limits of medical ethics. Patients have the option of selecting the offered treatment, discussing alternatives, or seeking a second opinion.
But at no point does the responsibility for the treatment shift from the doctor to the patient. If it did, then malpractice suits would be meaningless, since doctors would not be responsible for their own practice.
It is easy to forget this in the case of abortions, though, because abortions are conducted outside the normal model of medical treatment. There is no diagnosis, no intent to treat illness, and no ethical boundary to action. You could just tear the fetus out for no reason at all, and let it suffocate in the garbage, and no ethical question need be asked. It is a wild west mentality.
Fighting to maintain this ethical vacuum, rather than establish clear rules for the ethical treatment of fetuses by doctors, is irrational and unconscionable.
Doctors are not obligated to do what their patients request. They are not "hired" to perform a specified task.
Doctors are charged with the responsibility of making a medically sound diagnosis and offering treatments, supported by evidence, to treat the diagnosed illness. In doing so, they are bound by the limits of medical ethics. Patients have the option of selecting the offered treatment, discussing alternatives, or seeking a second opinion.
But at no point does the responsibility for the treatment shift from the doctor to the patient. If it did, then malpractice suits would be meaningless, since doctors would not be responsible for their own practice.
It is easy to forget this in the case of abortions, though, because abortions are conducted outside the normal model of medical treatment. There is no diagnosis, no intent to treat illness, and no ethical boundary to action. You could just tear the fetus out for no reason at all, and let it suffocate in the garbage, and no ethical question need be asked. It is a wild west mentality.
Fighting to maintain this ethical vacuum, rather than establish clear rules for the ethical treatment of fetuses by doctors, is irrational and unconscionable.
1
What it's really all about, what it's always really been about, is that these religious fundamentalists are driven insane at the thought of women having sex without the possible biological consequences. This has always been the ultimate threat that kept "nice" girls in line, while allowing males the freedom to sow their wild oats and go merrily on their way. Trump really blew their cover when he immediately refused to consider holding the man equally culpable. But just go read Gail's column today. She says it all, and says it better than anyone else around right now.
11
Trump inadvertently has provided a service to the nation. He sometimes exposes -- blurts out -- the shear hypocrisy of certain Republican long-standing positions that the latter feel the need to disguise. The most recent example concerns abortion.
The Republican position is that abortion should be illegal. The only quibble is if there should be no (e.g. Rubio?) or a very few execptions (e.g. rape). Given that illegality, logically there should be penalties, that, again logically, should be applied to all involved parties. Of course, politics require that logic not be applied in favor of a song-and-dance. Republicans don't want to prosecute either the male given the still, albeit declining, male orientation of society, and especially of the Republican "base", and certainly not the potential mother, which would require a conspicuous slap at motherhood itself. Who's left? The doctor, of course.
In this instance, all Trump did is blatantly expose the general hypocrisy of the Party on this subject.
Trump aside, abortion is not, and should not be, "murder"; a blastocyst is not a "baby", and a woman's decision concerning her own body is not a matter for politicians pandering to their "base". Time to dump hypocrisy.
The Republican position is that abortion should be illegal. The only quibble is if there should be no (e.g. Rubio?) or a very few execptions (e.g. rape). Given that illegality, logically there should be penalties, that, again logically, should be applied to all involved parties. Of course, politics require that logic not be applied in favor of a song-and-dance. Republicans don't want to prosecute either the male given the still, albeit declining, male orientation of society, and especially of the Republican "base", and certainly not the potential mother, which would require a conspicuous slap at motherhood itself. Who's left? The doctor, of course.
In this instance, all Trump did is blatantly expose the general hypocrisy of the Party on this subject.
Trump aside, abortion is not, and should not be, "murder"; a blastocyst is not a "baby", and a woman's decision concerning her own body is not a matter for politicians pandering to their "base". Time to dump hypocrisy.
6
Mr. Trump is a “truth-teller” who has, maybe inadvertently, put his finger on authoritarian conservatives’ logic regarding abortion.
Unfortunately, that logic doesn’t stop at abortion. If a pregnant woman is criminally responsible for what happens to her fetus, then why not jail her for endangering the fetus by taking drugs (as already happens in some states)? By drinking? By not eating “right”?
And why stop there? Since any sexually-active woman of childbearing age might be pregnant without knowing it, doesn't the same logic say that those penalties should apply to them, as well?
Mr. Trump’s misstatement(?) may have done us all a big favor, by showing how anti-abortion politics logically leads to permanent minority status for women (until menopause, at least). I’m pretty sure this is a road that those in favor of women’s rights, even those who are emotionally pro-life, won’t want to go down.
Unfortunately, that logic doesn’t stop at abortion. If a pregnant woman is criminally responsible for what happens to her fetus, then why not jail her for endangering the fetus by taking drugs (as already happens in some states)? By drinking? By not eating “right”?
And why stop there? Since any sexually-active woman of childbearing age might be pregnant without knowing it, doesn't the same logic say that those penalties should apply to them, as well?
Mr. Trump’s misstatement(?) may have done us all a big favor, by showing how anti-abortion politics logically leads to permanent minority status for women (until menopause, at least). I’m pretty sure this is a road that those in favor of women’s rights, even those who are emotionally pro-life, won’t want to go down.
4
Incredible! Donald Trump once again revealed what the other candidates only soft pedal - that women should be punished for their part in dealing with an unwanted pregnancy. Males are just bystanders in the process as far as they are concerned.
It seems so ironic to me that in Italy, the most Catholic country in the world, abortion became legal in 1978 where it has remained legal. There are no gauntlets of screaming people a woman has to make her way though, no waiting periods, and no indignity the woman has to deal with. It is a private decision that is hers, and hers alone to make. As it should be.
Republicans want women in this country to be as controlled and restricted as they are in the Middle Eastern theocracies. Why any woman would consider voting for a Republican is beyond my understanding. For that matter why would anyone except white, wealthy, straight males vote for a Republican?
It seems so ironic to me that in Italy, the most Catholic country in the world, abortion became legal in 1978 where it has remained legal. There are no gauntlets of screaming people a woman has to make her way though, no waiting periods, and no indignity the woman has to deal with. It is a private decision that is hers, and hers alone to make. As it should be.
Republicans want women in this country to be as controlled and restricted as they are in the Middle Eastern theocracies. Why any woman would consider voting for a Republican is beyond my understanding. For that matter why would anyone except white, wealthy, straight males vote for a Republican?
9
Trump is actually right and only expresses what abortion opponents believe but are savvy enough not to vocalize because they know that it is an untenable position that would eliminate sympathy for their position. Journalists have never cornered these pro-lifers politicians to actually take their position to its logical conclusion, so it was refreshing to see Trump cornered. At least on this, Trump is morally consistent. Why should the seeker of the abortion be spared punishment if she is committing murder, as they believe? Also, journalist never question the moral consistency of anti-choicers who favor exceptions. If each life is innocent, why is a life created from rape or incest less innocent and therefore can be sacrificed? As an abortion rights supporter, I at least respect those anti-choicers who reject the exceptions.
They at least hold a morally consistent position.
As for not wanting to punish women, unnecessary and burdensome regulations for abortion clinics and contraception and defunding planned parenthood, are already punishing women.
They at least hold a morally consistent position.
As for not wanting to punish women, unnecessary and burdensome regulations for abortion clinics and contraception and defunding planned parenthood, are already punishing women.
71
This is all about controlling women. It baffles me how many women care more about fetal life than a woman's freedom to control her own body and her own life. Very sad.
This is what Big Government looks like to me. Right into my womb.
This is what Big Government looks like to me. Right into my womb.
6
The state is all too ready to charge women with murder when they hide their pregnancy, give birth alone, and leave the newborn in the trash. Why didn't these women acknowledge that they were pregnant and consider an abortion? Because the anti-abortion people have captured the narrative and made them feel that abortion is the worst thing they could possibly think of or do. Instead, faced with the actual baby, they do indeed commit a murder. These women, two of them in the New York City area in the past couple of weeks, are truly the victims of the anti-abortion movement. Who defends them?
6
hhhhmmm ... murder, you say ?
then other are complicit and may be said to be abetting murder
th mother, of course
th doctor who performs it
all th staff in th who help
th receptionist
th maker of any medical implements used in th procedure
th cleaning staff
and of course, th person who drives th patient to th clinic
then other are complicit and may be said to be abetting murder
th mother, of course
th doctor who performs it
all th staff in th who help
th receptionist
th maker of any medical implements used in th procedure
th cleaning staff
and of course, th person who drives th patient to th clinic
3
What about the man who impregnated the woman the necessating the abortion, Shouldn't he be punished to?
I would ask all those who proclaim they are pro life to tell the public how many unwanted children they have adopted and are raising or have raised to adulthood.
6
Man's opposition to abortion is a macho characteristic and a display of male superiority. It is the woman's right to decide what happens to her body, whether conception was intended or unforeseen, voluntary or forced.
2
Those poor women...so fragile, so wishy-washy, so emotional, so hormonal - so susceptible to being victims. We need strong, logical, protective men to steer them in the righteous direction.
8
This is the best piece I've read in response to Trump this week. It's so easy, isn't it, for the anti-choice movement to talk about choice in the abstract. Thank you for this exacting perspective.
Right before Roe v. Wade, my mother did not have CHOICE, and this is what it looked like. https://twitter.com/terilynncarter/status/716039331563962368
Right before Roe v. Wade, my mother did not have CHOICE, and this is what it looked like. https://twitter.com/terilynncarter/status/716039331563962368
2
Trump is simply exposing the conservatism for what it really is: A Fraud. Abortion is one of the ways to control the population, in this case women. The policies toward the poor are exactly the same: forcing the poor to extreme situations with scorn and belittling, the indignity of dependence on charity or work fo peanuts. Total control. In contrast, the government policies toward poor offer dignity, their own path to independence without begging. Same with health care: poor having full access to health care is just so unjust, they haven't earned it, for god's sake!
1
Religion's power to implant absurd ideas in weak minds is nothing new. It is interesting to see how their political spokespersons carefully screen and tone down the actual message in order to avoid frightening the non-zombies.
Trump has inadvertently exposed what evil preachers are really saying in private, much as Romney did with his 47% speech in 2012.
Trump has inadvertently exposed what evil preachers are really saying in private, much as Romney did with his 47% speech in 2012.
7
A thoughtful overview. I'd add that the outcry against abortions is so shrill that many doctors, even in the case of harm to a patient, won't risk performing the procedure under Roe.
I can only imagine an increase in fatalities and imprisonment if the political-social right have their way.
I can only imagine an increase in fatalities and imprisonment if the political-social right have their way.
Where are the men in all this? The pregnant woman is the criminal? When the culpability related to such allegedly murderous acts is shared equally between the 2 people who contribute the DNA we can at least have a real conversation. Men - step it up! The Divine Conception happened only once, and anti-abortion protesters know that very well.
4
Well done as I would expect from the Nation.
2
OK. So you're going to force a woman to bear a child which she doesn't want and/or can't afford. What js going to be the future of that child?? Will there be education, health care and employment opportunities as he/she grows?Somehow, anything beyond the point of being born is seldom discussed.
5
To answer your second question, the answer is no because government must be drowned in the bathtub, don't you know. Government won't be able to afford any funding for medical care, employment opportunities, food, shelter, education, or anything else that government funds to improve the life of the unwanted child.
This is the Republican party's goal for the last 40 years.
This is the Republican party's goal for the last 40 years.
1
Right after I find myself at 60 plus and a male able to carry a child for nine months I will know that I should be able to prevent other mothers from having control of their bodies.
How many of Donald's and the other Republican blowhards countless lovers and ex-wives have had abortions?
There is a story to get on, please.
How many of Donald's and the other Republican blowhards countless lovers and ex-wives have had abortions?
There is a story to get on, please.
8
Truly impressive analysis of the relationship between abortion and the logic of the anti-abortion position. The entire anti-abortion movement is but one of several efforts to impose the religious positions of a determined minority on the majority of Americans holding many different beliefs.
What concerns me is that I know of no one looking for a way out of this legal-moral-religious morass. I offer the following by returning to Justice Blackmun's majority opinion in Roe V. Wade. Despite Justice Stevens's warning to the contrary, Blackmun made and SCOTUS endorsed an unforced error.
They could have rendered void the entire anti-abortion/anti-contraception controversy by ruling that questions about these issues fell under the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of religion and its prohibition of an establishment of religion. As matters of religious convictions, people of different faiths have different beliefs about the beginning of life. Blackmun detailed, then dismissed, such considerations. His recitation of these differing beliefs should have advised SCOTUS that any decision other than choice violated the Constitution.
The consequences of that clearly incorrect decision continue to bedevil both it and the country. Like Dred Scott decision, Roe v. Wade requires a reversal which teaching the country what its invocation on both sides of the argument of the First Amendment really means.
What concerns me is that I know of no one looking for a way out of this legal-moral-religious morass. I offer the following by returning to Justice Blackmun's majority opinion in Roe V. Wade. Despite Justice Stevens's warning to the contrary, Blackmun made and SCOTUS endorsed an unforced error.
They could have rendered void the entire anti-abortion/anti-contraception controversy by ruling that questions about these issues fell under the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of religion and its prohibition of an establishment of religion. As matters of religious convictions, people of different faiths have different beliefs about the beginning of life. Blackmun detailed, then dismissed, such considerations. His recitation of these differing beliefs should have advised SCOTUS that any decision other than choice violated the Constitution.
The consequences of that clearly incorrect decision continue to bedevil both it and the country. Like Dred Scott decision, Roe v. Wade requires a reversal which teaching the country what its invocation on both sides of the argument of the First Amendment really means.
3
If women should be punished more than they already are when they seek an abortion, then why do the men who were equally responsible for creating the fetus not face the same punishment? For example, what about the guy who insists that he doesn't want a child under any circumstances and threatens his 17-year old pregnant girlfriend unless she has an abortion?
2
Women; agency; autonomy. End of story.
1
There should be a specific law on the books governing punishment fo those who have and those who perform illegial abortion.
There should also be a specific specific guidlines for women who are receiving government financial help, yet contine on to have another child.
There should also be a specific specific guidlines for women who are receiving government financial help, yet contine on to have another child.
1
Since abortion is currently legal, not illegial, I don't think I get what you mean. Is it that all abortion should be illegal because your religious beliefs need to be imposed on everybody, and both women and men should be punished harshly until they stop with the sex?
1
Well abortion is legal. Maybe you could spend your vindictive energy on males. It would make more sense for you.
1
Any first year law student can tell you that "murder" is the unlawful killing by a human being of another human being with malice aforethought. Abortion is not murder because it's lawful. Please quote Trump in context. I believe he said, speaking hypothetically, that if abortion is illegal it's logical that there should be criminal punishment for violating the laws that make it illegal. And let's get real about this, the Supreme Court is never going to go back to the old pre-Roe days and make abortion illegal. It will continue, however, to stand by its argument in Roe and its progeny that the Government does have a compelling interest in protecting the life of a fetus once it is viable.
2
I can understand someone who has a deep philosophical belief that all life is sacred and should never be destroyed by human hands. But the overwhelming number of anti-abortionists don't really believe in universal sacredness. Nor do they object to destroying human life, born or unborn. Instead they believe that they are the ones who should decide when and whether life is sacred. They involk the divine and the sacred, but only as a tool to be dispensed for their own political ends.
There was no opposition from pro-lifers when 500,000 Iraqi children died as a direct result of US bombing of water treatment plants. No pro-lifers line up against US agribusiness in India that ruined family farms and caused the starvation of children. And even the innocent fetus that they so fervently wish to protect quickly looses the mantle of innocence once born into poverty. Then issues like greater infant mortality in poor neighborhoods, malnutrition and a lowered life expectancy never invoke the need to preserve the sacredness of that very same fetus, now a full human person.
This of course is not true for all anti-abortionists, but the politicization of a woman's right to make this deep, profound choice free from condemnation or interference highlights the hypocrisy and ulterior motives of many in the "pro-life" movement. Reflecting principles of the divine will is very different from believing you are the divine. Too many pro-lifers don't seem to know the difference.
There was no opposition from pro-lifers when 500,000 Iraqi children died as a direct result of US bombing of water treatment plants. No pro-lifers line up against US agribusiness in India that ruined family farms and caused the starvation of children. And even the innocent fetus that they so fervently wish to protect quickly looses the mantle of innocence once born into poverty. Then issues like greater infant mortality in poor neighborhoods, malnutrition and a lowered life expectancy never invoke the need to preserve the sacredness of that very same fetus, now a full human person.
This of course is not true for all anti-abortionists, but the politicization of a woman's right to make this deep, profound choice free from condemnation or interference highlights the hypocrisy and ulterior motives of many in the "pro-life" movement. Reflecting principles of the divine will is very different from believing you are the divine. Too many pro-lifers don't seem to know the difference.
9
It's embarrassing how primitive our country still is. We want to rely on technology and human ingenuity to mitigate all the predictable effects of overpopulation and overexploitation of resources, and yet many folks still want to insist on "life" being this precious, un-throw-awayable treasure that exists the moment an egg is fertilized - regardless of the cost to that egg's incubator. Everyone needs to be able to determine when, where, and with whom they reproduce. Abortion politics are all about controlling and enslaving women, and that is outrageous.
3
Why not punish the MAN who caused the unwanted pregnancy? If he had been responsible and used a condom or abstained,the woman would not be forced into making difficult choices. Rape is an illegal attack on a female(and male) body and is punished. A woman has the right to protect and care for her body. She alone makes those decisions. Everyone else needs to apply their morals and beliefs and ethics to theirs own lives.
1
Since the anti-abortion group's position is not based in reason, you cannot use logic/reason to counter their position.
3
Thank you, Katha Pollitt, for putting your finger on what was so very off about Trump's comments (and his "clarification." ) All that double talk is obviously essential to the "pro-life" side (the title itself is doubletalk.
9
Why does this all have to be so complicated? Why can't we all respect that every woman should have the right to make whatever decision her conscience allows? Some will choose to have an abortion. Others will not.
3
Because apparently some people think the outcome for the fetus is too important to be left to the mother, and is better decided by some legislature composed of middle-aged men.
1
When life begins is not definable. It is only definable by ones world view, religion, or philosophy of life.
The people that want to tell other people what their world view, religion, or philosophy of life MUST be are leading the United States to what the Founding Fathers worried about --- Majoritarian tyranny.
If the Majority does not stop telling a minority of people what their world view, religion, or philosophy of life must be then the United states will head down the path that will lead to the Second Great American Civil War.
The people that want to tell other people what their world view, religion, or philosophy of life MUST be are leading the United States to what the Founding Fathers worried about --- Majoritarian tyranny.
If the Majority does not stop telling a minority of people what their world view, religion, or philosophy of life must be then the United states will head down the path that will lead to the Second Great American Civil War.
Donald Trump is the new kid on the block, and he did not have enough political street smarts or native intelligence to know that Republicans are supposed to keep quiet about their contempt for women and about their anti-choice zeal for making women suffer. Under pressure from Chris Matthews, Trump let the cat out of the bag.
Worse for the Republicans, the cornered Trump also blurted out the other prong of the G.O.P. campaign against women: men have absolutely no legal responsibility in consensual sexual matters.
Worse for the Republicans, the cornered Trump also blurted out the other prong of the G.O.P. campaign against women: men have absolutely no legal responsibility in consensual sexual matters.
121
Focusing on Trump gives the rest of the GOP a pass. It also gives the Catholic Church a big pass while at the same time ignoring the fact that the massive tax exemptions enjoyed by it and other religious corporations give it the resources to exercise massive political power in DC and state houses across the country. Death to women is the ultimate result of these vicious and cruel laws and death to women is consistent with Many religions view of women as the source of all evil. It's time to end the sway of theocrats over our government, our laws and our health care. It's time to put actually born humans first. Yes, even if those actually born humans are WOMEN!
4
In the republican,conservative christian viewpoint women are here for men to have sex with, when they aren't cooking, cleaning and raising the kids.
They should be prepared. How? Heaven knows, maybe by forcing(?) the man to wear a condom when they're fertile, How's the man supposed to know or be responsible for such "lady stuff".
They also should never wear anything or behave in a way that would provoke a helpless man into performing, fulfilling, his god-ordained function.
The world would be a much better place if these types word a condom EVERY TIME they had sex, no exceptions, or do sperm also have a "right to life"
They should be prepared. How? Heaven knows, maybe by forcing(?) the man to wear a condom when they're fertile, How's the man supposed to know or be responsible for such "lady stuff".
They also should never wear anything or behave in a way that would provoke a helpless man into performing, fulfilling, his god-ordained function.
The world would be a much better place if these types word a condom EVERY TIME they had sex, no exceptions, or do sperm also have a "right to life"
1
Its obvious to any thinking person, that if the Republicans would speak the truth that Trump inadvertently did, the majority of Americans would not vote for them. Trump actually did us a favor by bringing this issue to the fore. There is something creepy about the way religious conservatives talk about abortion.
As a woman and mother of 3 children, I've given this issue much thought. Luckily I've never been in a position where I had to make this decision.
I really resent the meme that the poor thing doesn't know what she is doing and needs to be protected from herself. If women were really that fragile and childlike they should not be mothers.
As a woman and mother of 3 children, I've given this issue much thought. Luckily I've never been in a position where I had to make this decision.
I really resent the meme that the poor thing doesn't know what she is doing and needs to be protected from herself. If women were really that fragile and childlike they should not be mothers.
7
Maybe we should throw every woman who doesn't have a baby in jail.
Preventing a life is the same as murder isn't it?
Preventing a life is the same as murder isn't it?
3
I have used this argument (ie, if abortion is murder, then why don't we prosecute the women) for years in discussions with anti-abortion people...My question is, why did it take Donald Trump to cause this discussion? Why haven't Democrats and Planned Parenthood and all other pro choice groups pointed this out years ago? Had they, maybe fewer stupid anti abortion laws would have been passed and fewer clinics closed.
4
Wow. A great op-ed, Katha Pollitt, and great comments. I've never seen so much agreement in the comments on any article.
4
I am often confused by the term "pro-life" when it is self applied by people who are against many social programs that would help children, like early education, health care, and nutrition assistance. I am further confused when many of these same people are in favor of the death penalty and seem eager to rush into wars. They seem more "pro-birth" to me. I feel like these folks are in effect saying, "All life is sacred. Until we decide it isn't."
3
While we all mostly think Trump is a nut case, we need to recognize that his blatant unthinking words do open up a conversation. I just dont understand these people who profess to be pro-life. If they were really pro-life they would get a life of their own and leave women to make their own choices.
5
How about now some of our vaunted commentators subjecting Cruz and Kasich to the same prosecutorial logic as was Trump? I would especially like to see Cruz escape this logic.
4
While Mr Trump "mis-spoke". Ms Pollitt misses the essence of Mr Trump; that is, quite simply, Mr Trump, in his own ignorant manner, gives clear articulate common voice to the GOP's approach towards women since the Reagan years when that administration embraced these wretched policies. For those still unable to get the gist of Trump mathematically one can express the situation thusly: Trump = Sum total of all GOP rhetoric
2
Excellent article. Crime and punishment. While many see Trump's answer as vile, he has finally exposed the logic of banning, ergo, criminalizing abortion, and its consequence i.e. punishment --- thereby unmasking the political spin that has set and perpetuated the hypocritical GOP mantra on the issue - the woman and the fetus as being victims , the abortion provider (doctors, nurses, institution) as criminals. I am not a Trump supporter but his base should be proud of him ;) He really tells it like it is. This is that one time Mr. Trump made sense and should have doubled/tripled down on it. But alas, he has evolved as a political animal just like the other GOP candidates.
4
Trump's position was entirely logical. If you contract to kill your spouse or child (severely ill or not), you'll go to jail for a long time unless found insane or mentally incompetent. However, applying this logic to abortion is unpalatable to many, so they go after providers via legal punishment and restricting access to those without means.
A mother (and father) may have many reasons to have concerns about having a child: rape, incest, health of the mother, health or viability of the fetus (i.e. Zika, etc.), or financial concerns (i.e. on average ~250k to raise a child to 18, more for college, etc.). Additionally, a pregnancy tends to impact a woman (married or not) more than a man: biologically, educationally (i.e. if you get pregnant during high school/college), wages, time (if the primary care giver), etc.
It denies human nature to tell woman (and men) that they shouldn't have sex (married or not) unless they can afford the consequences of unintended pregnancy (and, yes, contraceptives are not 100% effective). From a policy standpoint, having access to safe and legal abortions is the best response to human nature and real-life concerns. Do I like it? No. Do I support it? Yes, very much so.
A mother (and father) may have many reasons to have concerns about having a child: rape, incest, health of the mother, health or viability of the fetus (i.e. Zika, etc.), or financial concerns (i.e. on average ~250k to raise a child to 18, more for college, etc.). Additionally, a pregnancy tends to impact a woman (married or not) more than a man: biologically, educationally (i.e. if you get pregnant during high school/college), wages, time (if the primary care giver), etc.
It denies human nature to tell woman (and men) that they shouldn't have sex (married or not) unless they can afford the consequences of unintended pregnancy (and, yes, contraceptives are not 100% effective). From a policy standpoint, having access to safe and legal abortions is the best response to human nature and real-life concerns. Do I like it? No. Do I support it? Yes, very much so.
2
"Trust women" -- the pin my ObGyn wears on her lapel. The pin ACOG used in lobbying Congress decades ago to preserve women's rights to bodily autonomy.
So very refreshing to read Kathy Pollitt's manifesto of women as fully functional, competent beings. Competent to make decisions about our lives, about our bodies.
Republican "lawmakers": keep your condescending, sanctimonious, and religious views away from my body. The Supreme Court established the parameters for my Constitutional freedom to make decisions about my body should I get pregnant. In 1973. Move on. Stop pandering to your base.
Please turn to providing economic and social support for the children born. Zygotes learn to walk. They need food, shelter and safety. Women do not need your help with the zygote decision.
So very refreshing to read Kathy Pollitt's manifesto of women as fully functional, competent beings. Competent to make decisions about our lives, about our bodies.
Republican "lawmakers": keep your condescending, sanctimonious, and religious views away from my body. The Supreme Court established the parameters for my Constitutional freedom to make decisions about my body should I get pregnant. In 1973. Move on. Stop pandering to your base.
Please turn to providing economic and social support for the children born. Zygotes learn to walk. They need food, shelter and safety. Women do not need your help with the zygote decision.
4
I'm a conservative (well, actually more libertarian) and I agree 100% with this op-ed. If you truly believe that abortion is the murder of an unborn child, then the woman is just a guilty as a woman who hires a hit man to kill her husband. Yes, maybe the husband was abusive, but that's not sufficient justification to hire someone to kill him. So regardless of a woman's mental state (except for a valid insanity defense) murder is murder, regardless of who the victim is.
It has been said that the best way to get a stupid law repealed is to enforce it vigorously. Perhaps liberals should force religious conservatives to face their hypocrisy by proposing amendments to restrictive abortion laws that make the woman equally culpable for any attempt to avoid the proposed restrictions.
It has been said that the best way to get a stupid law repealed is to enforce it vigorously. Perhaps liberals should force religious conservatives to face their hypocrisy by proposing amendments to restrictive abortion laws that make the woman equally culpable for any attempt to avoid the proposed restrictions.
2
Congrats to the FDA for bringing women one step closer to accessing the medication to provide for a private, safe, personal decision. Let those men make all the laws they can to keep women from arriving at the clinic. One day the clinic won't matter at all and that will be a win for women all over the world.
1
Thank you for highlighting AZ implication that you don't punish women because they are "unable to make rational decisions." if it is a crime, and women are of legal age, then they should be punished.
We should not let right-wing groups portray women as unable to make their own decisions because of mental incapacity. If you believe women are incapable of making decisions, what happens if a woman tries to use a coat hanger to end her own pregnancy (as illustrated in the article)? Do you punish the coat hanger manufacturer?
We should not let right-wing groups portray women as unable to make their own decisions because of mental incapacity. If you believe women are incapable of making decisions, what happens if a woman tries to use a coat hanger to end her own pregnancy (as illustrated in the article)? Do you punish the coat hanger manufacturer?
2
A child needs love as much as he or she needs food, shelter and an education. As any human being can tell you, being forced to do something is not going to result in love, I assure you. This is a point that is missed in all this pro life movement.
1
I do not recognize the country I live in anymore. De-fund Planned Parenthood, the SNAP program, housing, education, infrastructure and healthcare but save the baby! INSANITY!
8
The obnoxious and flawed argument by Ms. Pollitt that abortion is "murder" is one that many would contest. The issue is an old one, and even the Roman Catholic Church, has moved the goal posts over the years from "quickening" to the moment of conception when there is a human life. Of course, not every woman is a Catholic and most physicians and many religious leaders agree that a first trimester abortion is absolutely not murder. But what is murder is forcing typically young women with limited means to carry a child to term and face a 30 times risk of death than having an abortion. And that is the Republican agenda nationwide in states like Texas, North Carolina and Ohio among many others. Women will certainly die as a result of the "denial of access," and "Yes, Ms. Pollitt" you and your comrades supporting "the right to die" will have their blood on your hands.
2
You miss her point. She is not saying that she believes abortion is murder. She is saying that if pro-lifers consider a fetus to be a human being, then the pregnant woman *should* be considered guilty of murder. And if they are unwilling to prosecute her, then they prove that they know full well that abortion is *not* murder.
2
EvelynU Sorry that I missed the subtlety of Ms. Pollitt strong, but evidently satiric, take on The Donald and the pro-life movement. If so, I apologize to her, but not those who are condoning the murder of women and even the doctors who provide abortion services. It's patriarchy and misogyny and sexual enslavement of women. That's been punishment enough!
How is it possible for anyone to feel sympathy for Donald Trump? Yet, watching him actually take time to try to come up with the "right" response to Chris Matthews' question about punishment for women who seek out abortions suggested that maybe he doesn't operate totally off the cuff. But, it was his answer that inspired the "sympathy". Of course, once Roe is overturned, threatening to punish the victim is absolutely the next step. From fines to jail time to lashing, it's coming. Trump was simply too early...
1
Thank you for saying what needs to be said here and for reminding us how condescending people are toward those they deem to be "victims." The women I know who have had abortions made adult and considered decisions; so a did a few who gave children up for adoption. But the majority of those who did the latter were forced to do so by their parents at a time when the belief was that having a child out of wedlock (what a great term) brought shame not just to the woman (never to the father) but also to her parents.
4
I am puzzled by what the media left out in their investigation of Trumps' comments with Chris Hayes. After the famous punishment line, Chris asked Trump if the men/ the impregnators should be held to account in any way. Trumps' answer was, "NO!"
Why hasn't the media publicized this? Why don't the patriarchal pro-zygote leagues ever mention the men's part in an unwanted pregnancy, often extremely unwanted by adulterous/abusive/incestuous/rapist men. Why hasn't the media picked up on this, because most of the media are the impregnating kind too?
Why hasn't the media publicized this? Why don't the patriarchal pro-zygote leagues ever mention the men's part in an unwanted pregnancy, often extremely unwanted by adulterous/abusive/incestuous/rapist men. Why hasn't the media picked up on this, because most of the media are the impregnating kind too?
6
Dear white, rich, (mostly) male politicians: GET OUT OF MY BEDROOM!
You ARE IN FACT punishing women by ending your pro-life stand at birth, leaving women and families to fend for themselves - if you succeed in cutting all services you deem superfluous.
Why don't you spend your time with REALLY serious problems, like election manipulation and climate change (which includes overpopulation).
You ARE IN FACT punishing women by ending your pro-life stand at birth, leaving women and families to fend for themselves - if you succeed in cutting all services you deem superfluous.
Why don't you spend your time with REALLY serious problems, like election manipulation and climate change (which includes overpopulation).
5
The pro-choice people love this issue of whether a woman should be punished for having an abortion because it's an issue they can win. But it's a side show.
How about this much more real issue: when should it be lawful to abort a late term, fully formed fetus?
How about this much more real issue: when should it be lawful to abort a late term, fully formed fetus?
2
There should be a punishment for anyone breaking a law.
Whether abortion should be outlawed is a different question.
Abortion should not be outlawed.
Whether abortion should be outlawed is a different question.
Abortion should not be outlawed.
Speaking honestly, Abortion is murder. As the Court ruled in Roe v Wade it is up to the state to determine where the rights of the child and the rights of the mother are balanced. After that point, be it 20 weeks or 20 minutes, the state has the absolute right to protect the child.
After that point the mother must accept the fact that if she terminates the pregnancy she is committing murder. She must accept the legal consequences of her actions.
Just as the father who kills the rapist who attacks his daughter, society can erect protocols that "punish" her without sending her to prison for life.
But any nation and any society who advocates and allows the murder of hundreds of thousands of its citizens, can no longer be considered a government of the people.
After that point the mother must accept the fact that if she terminates the pregnancy she is committing murder. She must accept the legal consequences of her actions.
Just as the father who kills the rapist who attacks his daughter, society can erect protocols that "punish" her without sending her to prison for life.
But any nation and any society who advocates and allows the murder of hundreds of thousands of its citizens, can no longer be considered a government of the people.
1
I wish a writer for the New York Times would bring up a more balanced view on abortion and not just bring up extreme examples. How about looking at abortion laws in countries like Norway, a country that is considered one of the best countries to be a woman in, but still has more restrictions on abortion than the US? Concern and care for the unborn doesn't have to be anti woman. Standing up for women's right does not have to mean pushing for unlimited access to abortion and being pro-life does not not have to mean outlawing abortion. A little openness on both sides of the issue could potentially benefit both women and the unborn. How about guaranteed paid maternity leave for starters?
1
Are we all really holding on by such a thin thread? Are we really unable to empathize with the "other". Does our need for self righteousness trump compassion whenever we enter the public square. Those poor pro-lifers, they need our support and tenderness now more then ever.
As many of us where taught in our churches, logic is the tool of the Devil. Ms Pollitt is a tricky one for sure, and has got them in a tough spot. Please hug one if your able, this must be a very painful time.
Thank you again Mr. Trump!
As many of us where taught in our churches, logic is the tool of the Devil. Ms Pollitt is a tricky one for sure, and has got them in a tough spot. Please hug one if your able, this must be a very painful time.
Thank you again Mr. Trump!
I've been wondering about this for a while. If conservatives truly believe that abortion is murder, then why don't they think that the women should be convicted (or shot) just as much as the doctors?
Just too afraid of losing more of the women's vote?
Just too afraid of losing more of the women's vote?
1
they believe in going light on th women folk
and whos gonna do th cooking and cleaning if th little ladies are all in th hoosegow
and whos gonna do th cooking and cleaning if th little ladies are all in th hoosegow
Thank you Ms. Pollitt for putting into words what I couldn't articulate. I am sending this article to everyone I know.
1
I'm beginning to agree with Trump supporters about his 'telling it like is,' though not for the same reasons. He's like the boil on America's butt, bringing ugly infections like racism and misogyny to a head. Yes, by all means, let's talk about the ugly ignorant rhetoric of the anti-choice movement. If you say abortion is murder, then walk the talk, and take the consequences. Stop hiding behind your completely hypocritical 'concern' for either fetuses or women.
7
Penny Nance, the president of 'Concerned Women for America' dares to declare with a straight face that a woman having an abortion is 'broken and wounded',
Does that mean that when a woman is forced to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term, even in case of incest and rape, or not being able to feed and cloth yet another child, she will be 'happy and content'
In addition it seems that a vast majority of those calling themselves to be 'pro-life' are also the ones that support the death penalty, and insist on unfettered access to guns because of their willful misinterpretation of the 2nd Amendment.
'Pro-life' is an oxymoron if I ever saw one. It is nothing but religious zealotry par excellence trying to impose their will on all women.
Does that mean that when a woman is forced to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term, even in case of incest and rape, or not being able to feed and cloth yet another child, she will be 'happy and content'
In addition it seems that a vast majority of those calling themselves to be 'pro-life' are also the ones that support the death penalty, and insist on unfettered access to guns because of their willful misinterpretation of the 2nd Amendment.
'Pro-life' is an oxymoron if I ever saw one. It is nothing but religious zealotry par excellence trying to impose their will on all women.
8
I think it is very easy to see women as victims in the case of abortion, if we presume that women are the sexual victims of men. And this is not about rape only, but in being "seduced and abandoned." Under those circumstances, abortion becomes a matter of the woman saving herself.
I find the punishment argument troubling, because it can require an in-depth discussion into the woman's life and her circumstances, which violates privacy.
Yet, I am also troubled by the argument of women as being victims. Not all women are victims. Some women are incredibly responsible about who they date and the circumstances under which they have sex. Notwithstanding resources that might be available for birth control, the research indicates that that a lot of women's birth control use is incredibly irresponsible.
Some might argue that we need more sex education and access, but I find it hard to believe that there is insufficient information and access in today's world.
I find the punishment argument troubling, because it can require an in-depth discussion into the woman's life and her circumstances, which violates privacy.
Yet, I am also troubled by the argument of women as being victims. Not all women are victims. Some women are incredibly responsible about who they date and the circumstances under which they have sex. Notwithstanding resources that might be available for birth control, the research indicates that that a lot of women's birth control use is incredibly irresponsible.
Some might argue that we need more sex education and access, but I find it hard to believe that there is insufficient information and access in today's world.
I understand the moral reasoning behind the idea that abortion is wrong and unethical, and I can’t completely disagree with it. And certainly any woman who chooses to continue an unwanted pregnancy because she feels it’s the right thing to do, even in the face of social and financial hardship, should be applauded for performing such an unselfish act. But what’s really being debated here is whether or not she should be forced by the law, against her will, to donate the use of her body for 9 months, at the end of which she will undergo a very painful procedure that has the potential to threaten her health, and possibly her life. If she refuses to do that, do we really want to punish her for it? We don’t punish people who refuse to donate bone marrow or kidneys, or even something as safe and painless as donating blood. Should all these things be legally mandatory as well?
2
None of these statements by Republican hopefuls can be taken seriously at this point, as they are merely a part of the game. They bear no relation to what would become reality should they, and their cohort in congress, gain absolute power.
They would no longer be content with the constant nibbling around the edges of the legal abortion rights of women, as they have been doing in many states for many years now, making it extremely difficult, if not in some cases impossible, for a woman to exercise this constitutionally guaranteed right.
As evidenced by the statements in the article, their omission of exception for the *health* of the mother or the *health* of the fetus, as always, illustrates their disinterest in the lives of those they would condemn to the consequences of their policies, not the pregnant woman, not the fetus, not any possible live children or family involved.
They would no longer be content with the constant nibbling around the edges of the legal abortion rights of women, as they have been doing in many states for many years now, making it extremely difficult, if not in some cases impossible, for a woman to exercise this constitutionally guaranteed right.
As evidenced by the statements in the article, their omission of exception for the *health* of the mother or the *health* of the fetus, as always, illustrates their disinterest in the lives of those they would condemn to the consequences of their policies, not the pregnant woman, not the fetus, not any possible live children or family involved.
Trump is right (at least the first time). If abortion is murder, then the woman is a murder. Period.
Ted Cruz's idea of the doctor being the only one culpable, makes no sense. If a woman hires someone to kill her new born child, she is at least as culpable as the actual trigger man. Why would it be any different for abortion if you believe that at unborn child is the same as one who has already been born?
I don't know how much this will hurt Trump, but wouldn't it be ironic if one of his few moments of clarity would be what brings him down?
Ted Cruz's idea of the doctor being the only one culpable, makes no sense. If a woman hires someone to kill her new born child, she is at least as culpable as the actual trigger man. Why would it be any different for abortion if you believe that at unborn child is the same as one who has already been born?
I don't know how much this will hurt Trump, but wouldn't it be ironic if one of his few moments of clarity would be what brings him down?
2
Ms. Pollitt is totally correct. Women are being punished right now when having to overcome the excessive burdens they need to surmount in order to avail themselves of a legal medical procedure. Prison might be another form of punishment down the line if Trump is elected, but to say women aren't being punished now is deafeningly false.
1
I'm pro choice.
But the links you provide for women being prosecuted are not so cut and dry. In one the baby was mutilates but alive and now will have to live a disfigured life. Who should be punished for this? It's horrid all around.
But the links you provide for women being prosecuted are not so cut and dry. In one the baby was mutilates but alive and now will have to live a disfigured life. Who should be punished for this? It's horrid all around.
Anti abortion people can not have it both ways . They can not claim that women have dignity then deny them the opportunity to express that dignity in the choices they make. They can not claim that children must be born into this society then deny that society has any obligation to help the child become a full member of that society. You can not claim the absolute dignity of people then treat them like breeding machines.
3
As disturbing as Mr. Trumps comments may have been, I fail to see how Mr. Cruz is much better with his insistence that women be forced to term, even in the case of rape or incest.
That certainly sounds like he is in favor of "punishing" the woman to me.
That certainly sounds like he is in favor of "punishing" the woman to me.
1
One of our children is the result of a birth control failure.
My husband and I were both going through grueling training programs in medicine. We planned on starting our family a year from when we actually did. We used birth control appropriately, and knew that every form of birth control short of removing our reproductive systems came with a risk of failure. Despite our diligence and care, especially because we were both working long and difficult hours, I became pregnant earlier than we were prepared.
Despite our fear and worry, the thought of abortion may have flashed across our minds for a nanosecond, but we never considered it. We were, and remain, both incredibly strong, determined, and knew we would be able to pull it off somehow, and we did. It was incredibly difficult, we were desperately sleep deprived and worked much harder than people should be asked to work, but we managed.
I would never presume to ask another human being to give up what we gave up, would never presume to ask another human being to make the sacrifices that we had to make, ultimately our marriage, because we were working so hard we didn't consider each other. Am I happy we had our son? There are no words to describe my happiness and joy. But it's no one else's business but ours.
Likewise, what people decide to do in the intimacy of their lives is none of my business, and no one belongs there except those involved. Birth control fails. Families should decide their limits, no one else.
My husband and I were both going through grueling training programs in medicine. We planned on starting our family a year from when we actually did. We used birth control appropriately, and knew that every form of birth control short of removing our reproductive systems came with a risk of failure. Despite our diligence and care, especially because we were both working long and difficult hours, I became pregnant earlier than we were prepared.
Despite our fear and worry, the thought of abortion may have flashed across our minds for a nanosecond, but we never considered it. We were, and remain, both incredibly strong, determined, and knew we would be able to pull it off somehow, and we did. It was incredibly difficult, we were desperately sleep deprived and worked much harder than people should be asked to work, but we managed.
I would never presume to ask another human being to give up what we gave up, would never presume to ask another human being to make the sacrifices that we had to make, ultimately our marriage, because we were working so hard we didn't consider each other. Am I happy we had our son? There are no words to describe my happiness and joy. But it's no one else's business but ours.
Likewise, what people decide to do in the intimacy of their lives is none of my business, and no one belongs there except those involved. Birth control fails. Families should decide their limits, no one else.
157
As a 65 year-old upper middle class man, husband, and father who has never been to war, I recognize that the most gut-wrenching decisions I have faced in life do not come within a 100 miles of the difficulty faced by women (let alone women with limited resources) with an unwanted pregnancies. Where's the '...but or the grace of God...' from these arrogant, women-hating, so-called 'pro-life' anti-choice advocates? The hypocrisy of their moralizing is staggering!
2
Anti-abortion people seem to be pro-death penalty. They have to be willing to give lethal injections to any woman who is caught getting an abortion.
Thank you, what a great essay. Mr. Trump spoke aloud a suppressed truth, that we do want to punish the woman for getting an abortion. Trump was referring to criminal procedures after a law is broken but the ugly truth is we already punish women for seeking an abortion - instead of after we do our punishing before the act.
Folks...come November don't stay home if your man isn't on the ballot for POTUS. I'm no fan of HRC but good lord she's better than anyone from the Rep class. Can you imagine an even more overtly right-wing political Court overturning Roe? Let a Repub in the WH and we won't need imagination.
As complicated as getting an abortion is now it's nothing compared to what it'll be like once Roe is overturned.
Folks...come November don't stay home if your man isn't on the ballot for POTUS. I'm no fan of HRC but good lord she's better than anyone from the Rep class. Can you imagine an even more overtly right-wing political Court overturning Roe? Let a Repub in the WH and we won't need imagination.
As complicated as getting an abortion is now it's nothing compared to what it'll be like once Roe is overturned.
If punishment is reserved for the person performing the abortion, what happens to women who self-abort?
Republicans like to claim that President Obama isn’t up to matching wits with Vladimir Putin. What then of Donald Trump who apparently can’t match wits with Chris Matthews?
Actually Trump answered exactly right if abortion is murder (only in religious minds) as the republicans claim and are able to get it illegal which is what they are trying to do. Republicans just hate it when the full truth of their policy's come out for everyones view.
When people and corporations start boycotting states like Ohio who institute this blatant discrimination against women, it will stop, just like the anti-gay bill in Georgia was halted by economic pressure. Strangely, the same tactics have not been used to protect women's rights.
2
Trump has made no secret of his sexual prowess, giving some pretty racy interviews long before he was ever entering politics. And while he has fathered 5 legitimate children, it has been with 3 wives, but you could use that, I suppose, to say that supports his pro-life position. I am wondering if there isn't an abortion out there in his past that has yet to come forth, either before, during, or between his various marriages......
Republicans believe that life begins at conception and ends at birth. Once a baby is born, it no longer matters. Starve it, let it fester in illnesses which are preventable but too costly to treat, keep it ignorant and uneducated. Then complain about the breakup of the nuclear family and the increase in incarceration rates. And blame it all on the "socialist left".
Their hypocrisy could not be more clear.
Their hypocrisy could not be more clear.
2
Twenty years in prison?
How is this poor woman a danger to society? Will she encourage other pregnant women to self abort? Twenty years?
So basically they are condemning her to never being able to have a child.
I see no compassion here.
How is this poor woman a danger to society? Will she encourage other pregnant women to self abort? Twenty years?
So basically they are condemning her to never being able to have a child.
I see no compassion here.
2
The problem of abortion in the U.S.?
What a truly horrifying intellectual tangle. I suppose roughly you have a right wing that is against it largely on religious grounds, though power of men over women is behind it a lot, while on the left wing side the emphasis is clearly that women should have the power when it comes to deciding on children (when to have children, quantity of such, if to abort, etc.).
The current political framing of the problem is mind bogglingly inadequate to deal with the fact men and women both make children, both have responsibility for such, the future of the human race is children, etc.
To give a hypothetical situation which demonstrates there is so much more to this tangle, imagine a catastrophe to the human race where only 2,500 people survive. Now obviously it would be best to increase number of people. But how to decide to do so, which is to say should it be men or women with final say? Obviously it would be absurd to speak of either sex having final say...Now imagine a vastly overpopulated world and with need to cut down on population. Who gets final say, indeed how would political process unfold here?
I apologize for just confusing things more than they already are, but I am just trying to show the absurdity of the whole argument as we understand it. Man, Woman, Child relationship is like a triangle, yet we reduce it to the bases (male, female) and constant argument. We just seem plain ill equipped to even have and raise children.
What a truly horrifying intellectual tangle. I suppose roughly you have a right wing that is against it largely on religious grounds, though power of men over women is behind it a lot, while on the left wing side the emphasis is clearly that women should have the power when it comes to deciding on children (when to have children, quantity of such, if to abort, etc.).
The current political framing of the problem is mind bogglingly inadequate to deal with the fact men and women both make children, both have responsibility for such, the future of the human race is children, etc.
To give a hypothetical situation which demonstrates there is so much more to this tangle, imagine a catastrophe to the human race where only 2,500 people survive. Now obviously it would be best to increase number of people. But how to decide to do so, which is to say should it be men or women with final say? Obviously it would be absurd to speak of either sex having final say...Now imagine a vastly overpopulated world and with need to cut down on population. Who gets final say, indeed how would political process unfold here?
I apologize for just confusing things more than they already are, but I am just trying to show the absurdity of the whole argument as we understand it. Man, Woman, Child relationship is like a triangle, yet we reduce it to the bases (male, female) and constant argument. We just seem plain ill equipped to even have and raise children.
Ms. Politt asserts that women who have abortions are, by and large, aware of what they are doing and it is disingenuous to refer to them as victims. The full logic of those who hold abortion to be wrong, Ms. Politt asserts, necessitates that women who have abortions be considered murders. But those who justify abortions may indeed be victims of ignorance. Many consider the unborn not human in its early stage of development. As such, the argument goes, the unborn do not have the rights of a human being. But saying that the unborn is not human because it is at an early stage of development is to be a victim of ignorance. Conception as such is the unique starting point of each person, the instant in which our unique genetic code is established. Physical development starts at conception but continues after birth. The brain, for example, is not fully developed till a person is in there 20’s. Slavers were victims of ignorance when they closed their eyes to the full humanity of blacks and others who close their eyes to the full humanity of women. Women and men are victims of ignorance when they close their eyes to the full humanity of the unborn, which in fact starts at conception.
1
This oped fillets anti abortion dogma with devastating logic.
But it's too late for that. Where is the grassroots plan for reproductive health in USA? The movement is getting killed out there.
But it's too late for that. Where is the grassroots plan for reproductive health in USA? The movement is getting killed out there.
1
Rafael Edward Cruz, Donald John Trump and John Richard Kasich are all strong arguments for contraception and abortion. Indeed, that was true of the entire Republican 2016 POTUS field. Even the egg and breast milk donor Fiorina, who never mothered her own biological child, fit well within the pack of these misogynist lesser endowed sperm donors.
2
The so-called “right to life” crowd really should be called “the society for perpetuating child suffering and abuse."
Without regard for other considerations, they fight tooth and nail to force each and every pregnancy to birth while, simultaneously, they are cutting all neonatal help, support or assistance and thus are ensuring pain, suffering and abuse for the youngest and most defenseless among us.
Maybe they’re the same ones who adamantly denied Catholic Priests were (still are?) molesting their charges thereby creating scores more broken and abused children…
Without regard for other considerations, they fight tooth and nail to force each and every pregnancy to birth while, simultaneously, they are cutting all neonatal help, support or assistance and thus are ensuring pain, suffering and abuse for the youngest and most defenseless among us.
Maybe they’re the same ones who adamantly denied Catholic Priests were (still are?) molesting their charges thereby creating scores more broken and abused children…
2
All of the millions of women that, like me, who have had abortions by their own choice for personal reasons need to speak out to destigmatize and demystify the decision making process and the lifetime after effects. My decision was the absolute right one for me at that time and the longer I live the more certain I am and I was NOT traumatized or consumed with guilt. Let's work to increase the use of safe medications to end early unwanted pregnancies and make them accessible and free and lets make free birth control a priority so women and men can control their reproductive destinies so we can have a world of wanted , loved children.
1
Great article. Bottom line: Men would never stand for restrictions put on their bodies such as is the discussion of women. Can you imagine Trump suggesting a man be thrown in prison for having an abortion (if he were able to do so)?
If there is a God, he/she certainly did not believe in equality in this respect.
If there is a God, he/she certainly did not believe in equality in this respect.
1
Make no mistake: Women who find themselves with an unwanted pregnancy are punished, whether they decide to have an abortion and then have to struggle to get one, or they are forced to carry the pregnancy to term. Women who make the choice to have an abortion are not victims for making that choice, only victims for how we treat them, and to the extent that we keep them from making that choice. Every woman in this country is a victim as long as it is the government who gets to determine the fate of her body and her future, but not because of the choice that she makes allowed by law.
3
I am in the pro-life movement and I have never heard anyone advocate for the prosecution or imprisonment of any woman who has had an abortion. That would be cruel and inhumane. They are already suffering enough through this painful and unfortunate procedure. We are there to comfort and support them at this very difficult time. If they need to talk, we are available to listen. We are compassionate and kind and never judge the woman who has already been through so much. I was so impressed with the pro-life people I met that I decided to join the group. We want to save lives not end them. This is our ultimate goal and an important one.
1
No, your ultimate goal is to ensure that woman cannot make their own choices.
2
are you th guys who stand outside abortion clinics w those gruesome pics of dismembered fetuses, and screaming at women wanting to enter (even if theyre not going in for an abortion -- ever think about that ??
is that supposed to be compassionate and-kind concern, comfort, support?
is that supposed to be compassionate and-kind concern, comfort, support?
1
Confucius — 'The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their proper name.' The insistence on the misuse of names is a blatant attempt to mislead and confuse. From the very beginning those opposed to treating women as autonomous individuals with rights equal to those of men have engaged in every artifice and sophism to maintain their position. And the very beginning predates Genesis. The inculcation of those values suppressing women are very carefully taught to children throughout our society. Anti-abortion and anti-choice efforts are anti-equal rights for women efforts pure and simple.
1
It is with sour amusement that I noted what may finally cause Trump's neofascist campaign to founder is the mere idea that women should be held responsible for hypothetically violating a law.
In the meantime, as we discuss the horrific idea that the state might interfere with women's bodily autonomy, let’s note we don't even bother to acknowledge that men beyond celibacy have no reproductive rights whatsoever.
The idea of male reproductive rights on a par with the rights of women in the West is so bizarre, so unthinkable, that it is simply not discussed. And yet we not only have no problem forcing men to become parents against their will--a thing sufficiently repugnant that Western societies rightly gave up forcing parenthood on women fifty and more years ago--we even proceed to jail men by the hundreds of thousands every year for the inability to pay child support, even when it is overwhelmingly the case that said inability to pay is due to poverty, and even though it is routinely the case that those men never agreed to become parents.
Men will overwhelmingly work like devils to support their children. And yet when they fail we have no problem putting the boot of the state on their necks, calling them the vilest names, and destroying their futures with prison, often over and over again.
Oh, and did I mention no one has yet found a child whose life or future was helped by throwing her father in jail for being poor?
In the meantime, as we discuss the horrific idea that the state might interfere with women's bodily autonomy, let’s note we don't even bother to acknowledge that men beyond celibacy have no reproductive rights whatsoever.
The idea of male reproductive rights on a par with the rights of women in the West is so bizarre, so unthinkable, that it is simply not discussed. And yet we not only have no problem forcing men to become parents against their will--a thing sufficiently repugnant that Western societies rightly gave up forcing parenthood on women fifty and more years ago--we even proceed to jail men by the hundreds of thousands every year for the inability to pay child support, even when it is overwhelmingly the case that said inability to pay is due to poverty, and even though it is routinely the case that those men never agreed to become parents.
Men will overwhelmingly work like devils to support their children. And yet when they fail we have no problem putting the boot of the state on their necks, calling them the vilest names, and destroying their futures with prison, often over and over again.
Oh, and did I mention no one has yet found a child whose life or future was helped by throwing her father in jail for being poor?
1
These conservative "pro-lifers" are also pro military.
How many relatives of these people have killed men ,women and children in foreign nations during war or police actions or to 'bring Democracy to the world"?
How many are in favor of drone attacks which have a 50% rate of killing non-combatants like wedding goers?
How many of these self proclaimed 'christians' want to make law their own sharia beliefs?
How many relatives of these people have killed men ,women and children in foreign nations during war or police actions or to 'bring Democracy to the world"?
How many are in favor of drone attacks which have a 50% rate of killing non-combatants like wedding goers?
How many of these self proclaimed 'christians' want to make law their own sharia beliefs?
1
Let me see if I get the logic right:
1) Abortion is murder.
2) Women who have abortions are NOT murderers.
3) The DOCTOR is the murderer.
Therefore having an abortion is not murder, so long as it is not performed by a doctor.
Oh, I see...
1) Abortion is murder.
2) Women who have abortions are NOT murderers.
3) The DOCTOR is the murderer.
Therefore having an abortion is not murder, so long as it is not performed by a doctor.
Oh, I see...
1
Trump's campaign is more and more like a strange ad hoc Saturday night live skit gone haywire. On one side, there's absurd hyperbole - punishing women for abortions, using nuclear weapons, building a 35-foot (no, 40-foot!) wall. These would get a roar on SNL, with the right comedian. Then he flat out defends Social Security and takes other liberal stands that weak-kneed Democrats only affirm in an inaudible whisper. But if we were waiting for him yesterday to proclaim "April Fools," we were disappointed. He's actually running, and at best he's revealing the utter hypocrisy of the Republican party, which has suddenly realized that it is the emperor and he is the child who declares what no one has dared to point out - the emperor wears no clothes.
The Republicans really have to get Mr. Trump a dog whistle. Explicating the cruel subtext of the anti-abortion movement (by accident, some say) exposes these fanatical frauds for what they are: morality fascists. They forgot to tell Mr. Trump that establishing abortion as murder with the force of law doesn't require actually punishing the so called murderer. There's an exception in this case because the murderer is a woman and the crime was the result of SEX, that dirty thing immoral people do without the permission of the gatekeepers of society. All the sanctimonious outcry from the anti-abortion crowd is about Mr. Trump blowing their cover; not for any regard for women whatsoever.
1
After watching the youtube video with Chris Matthews, I wish the media also picked up an important statement by Matthews. Trump was badgering him on his faith and the Catholic Church in regards to abortion. Finally, Matthews, who didn't want to air his personal views on TV said to Trump, but did, said, "We are a Secular Government". The Catholic Church, or any religion, does not, and should never, make our laws. We follow the Constitution.
2
Life begins at birth..legally and religiously. We never celebrate conception day. There is no sacrament for conception. It is the miracle of birth that makes a person. The soul enters the body at birth. A fetus is not and has never been a baby. A fetus is part of the womans body just like any other cell.
Are you saying that you remember your soul moving into the fetus?
Regardless, when you "moved in", you couldn't move in unless it was a living fetus. Therefore, it is a living fetus, baby, form of life.
Regardless, when you "moved in", you couldn't move in unless it was a living fetus. Therefore, it is a living fetus, baby, form of life.
I am confused as to the views of this piece and some of the "supportive" comments.
Are we to assume that the conclusion (punish women) is so patently wrong that it invalidates the premise (illegal abortion); or do we accept the conclusion as a logical consequence of a sound premise?
I think the intent of the article was the former - but I fear that some may be hearing and advocating the latter.
Are we to assume that the conclusion (punish women) is so patently wrong that it invalidates the premise (illegal abortion); or do we accept the conclusion as a logical consequence of a sound premise?
I think the intent of the article was the former - but I fear that some may be hearing and advocating the latter.
This, too, shall pass.
We're now seeing the evangelical/bigot/gun-worshiping/oligarchy coalition gasping for air as they resort to ever-more-desperate methods for keeping their fading power as an angry and incredulous American public is finally realizing the damage they are doing to our nation (thank you, Donald).
Their control of SCOTUS has been diminished, their success at gerrymandering and voter suppression is becoming so overt that a backlash has begin. The radical right is anxiously passing as many extreme anti-abortion, pro-gun, anti-government, anti-worker, and anti-gay laws as they can before being forced back under the rocks they lived under before Reagan invited them to join his party.
Throughout all this, Planned Parenthood has survived because millions of Americans refused to let the GOP kill it. Many of us have doubled, or tripled our donations to show how strong our support is for this besieged health care provider. Soon the Tea Party and the GOP, as we know it today, will be gone, and sanity will be restored.
We're now seeing the evangelical/bigot/gun-worshiping/oligarchy coalition gasping for air as they resort to ever-more-desperate methods for keeping their fading power as an angry and incredulous American public is finally realizing the damage they are doing to our nation (thank you, Donald).
Their control of SCOTUS has been diminished, their success at gerrymandering and voter suppression is becoming so overt that a backlash has begin. The radical right is anxiously passing as many extreme anti-abortion, pro-gun, anti-government, anti-worker, and anti-gay laws as they can before being forced back under the rocks they lived under before Reagan invited them to join his party.
Throughout all this, Planned Parenthood has survived because millions of Americans refused to let the GOP kill it. Many of us have doubled, or tripled our donations to show how strong our support is for this besieged health care provider. Soon the Tea Party and the GOP, as we know it today, will be gone, and sanity will be restored.
And still - still - the father never comes into the discussion.
No question of any punishment there, is there, because it is still the woman who must bear the consequences of the very same sexual act and the man walks away to pontificate - and legislate.
There is no way to change biology but shouldn't they be in discussion?
Often, the equally responsible man knows his partner is getting an abortion and is emphatically supportive - a co-conspirator - then.
In other instances the man can be identified - neighbor, teacher, co-worker, boss, guy who hangs out at the same bar, husband's best friend - you know who you are. Even if they did not know the woman was getting an abortion is he still not culpable? Like the driver of a car where the passengers go into a store and rob it? The punishment might be lesser but that would be up to a jury to decide.
Yes, we'd need a whole new area of jurisprudence - and a whole new area for lawyers to mine - the age of the woman - the circumstances of the unwanted pregnancy (did the contraception really fail? did she use any?) - the mental competency of the woman - manslaughter - murder - maybe since it was premeditated we could call it a capitol crime and see the ironic results of taking a life for allowing a doctor to take a "life" inside her own body.
And then the prosecution of the man - his complicity - ongoing relationship - one night stand - urged her to get an abortion - had no idea -
Mind boggling.
No question of any punishment there, is there, because it is still the woman who must bear the consequences of the very same sexual act and the man walks away to pontificate - and legislate.
There is no way to change biology but shouldn't they be in discussion?
Often, the equally responsible man knows his partner is getting an abortion and is emphatically supportive - a co-conspirator - then.
In other instances the man can be identified - neighbor, teacher, co-worker, boss, guy who hangs out at the same bar, husband's best friend - you know who you are. Even if they did not know the woman was getting an abortion is he still not culpable? Like the driver of a car where the passengers go into a store and rob it? The punishment might be lesser but that would be up to a jury to decide.
Yes, we'd need a whole new area of jurisprudence - and a whole new area for lawyers to mine - the age of the woman - the circumstances of the unwanted pregnancy (did the contraception really fail? did she use any?) - the mental competency of the woman - manslaughter - murder - maybe since it was premeditated we could call it a capitol crime and see the ironic results of taking a life for allowing a doctor to take a "life" inside her own body.
And then the prosecution of the man - his complicity - ongoing relationship - one night stand - urged her to get an abortion - had no idea -
Mind boggling.
Abortion is not murder, folks. The Supreme Court "fixed" it, so that it's a woman's right, much like your right to blow off the head of someone who comes on your property and threatens your life. The only difference is that it's a rare human fetus who threatens a woman's life these days, natal options being what they are.
Prolifers aren't talking punishment here. They're talking about stopping the the punishment. The human fetus is the party paying the price in this great dispute that has left us with over 50,000,000 dead humankind since 1973. Never in the history of humanity has there been such a stunning number of inhumanity.
We could stop fetal punishment with pregnant resources.....giving help to pregnant women to bring their child full term, provide more contraceptives and counseling, adoption assistance. There should be no punishment in a pregnancy, only understanding and help. And certainly no more abortions!
Prolifers aren't talking punishment here. They're talking about stopping the the punishment. The human fetus is the party paying the price in this great dispute that has left us with over 50,000,000 dead humankind since 1973. Never in the history of humanity has there been such a stunning number of inhumanity.
We could stop fetal punishment with pregnant resources.....giving help to pregnant women to bring their child full term, provide more contraceptives and counseling, adoption assistance. There should be no punishment in a pregnancy, only understanding and help. And certainly no more abortions!
3
Trump only mispoke the logical extension of a law making something illegal. Laws come with punishment. Anti abortion supporters have tip toed around the issue. As usual Trump put his foot in their mouth.
2
This editorial is more to the core of the abortion debate than commenters seem to realize. Anti-abortionists base their argument completely and entirely on the premise that an embryo is a human being and thus, as a human being, is entitled to the rights of a human being, particularly the right not to be killed.
IF that is your argument, then you are logically and inescapably bound to the conclusion that by intentionally and willfully killing a "human being," abortion is murder. And whenever abortion is done for the financial convenience of the mother, it is first degree murder. There are no laws or even interpretations of existing laws that allow any other conclusion if you start from the premise that abortion is killing a human being. Anti-abortionists cannot have it both ways. If abortion is wrong because it kills a human, then it if first degree murder and must be treated as such. If they want to distance themselves from this conclusion, as every single one does, then they must admit that it is a "special" kind of murder that really isn't the same kind of thing as strangling an infant who cries too much. But then, by admitting that embryos are different from babies in SOME ways, they will have abandoned their core premise against abortion and will then have to re-engage the discussion about how and when full human rights devolve.
Make no mistake, Ms. Pollit's argument strikes at the heart of anti-abortion rationale.
IF that is your argument, then you are logically and inescapably bound to the conclusion that by intentionally and willfully killing a "human being," abortion is murder. And whenever abortion is done for the financial convenience of the mother, it is first degree murder. There are no laws or even interpretations of existing laws that allow any other conclusion if you start from the premise that abortion is killing a human being. Anti-abortionists cannot have it both ways. If abortion is wrong because it kills a human, then it if first degree murder and must be treated as such. If they want to distance themselves from this conclusion, as every single one does, then they must admit that it is a "special" kind of murder that really isn't the same kind of thing as strangling an infant who cries too much. But then, by admitting that embryos are different from babies in SOME ways, they will have abandoned their core premise against abortion and will then have to re-engage the discussion about how and when full human rights devolve.
Make no mistake, Ms. Pollit's argument strikes at the heart of anti-abortion rationale.
217
Thank you, Peter, for an astute summary of the heart of the matter.
Frankly, what I don't understand is why the pro-life/anti-choice movement wouldn't seek to criminalize the actions of the mother. That they don't undercuts their entire argument.
Frankly, what I don't understand is why the pro-life/anti-choice movement wouldn't seek to criminalize the actions of the mother. That they don't undercuts their entire argument.
1
During the fracas of this past week I have seen several network and cable television news shows with anti-abortion spokespersons being interviewed, always squirming to avoid the harsh implications of charging mothers choosing abortion with murder. Those particular spokespersons have largely been women--a clear attempt to present a softer face and obfuscate the implications of near total bans on abortion. As Ms. Pollitt emphasizes, there is a disturbing rush to hide any moment of clarity, even as it occurs.
20
How about this: If a woman gets pregnant, via failed contraception, incest, etc., and she doesn't want to raise the child, the responsibility then automatically goes to the man who also took part in creating the "baby".
If the man refuses, he bears the same consequences as the woman—whether it's jail for abortion, prosecution for child abandonment, or whatever.
Ya think the right would go for that?
It's about time that all the falsity and prejudice of the anti-abortion proponents was brought to light.
If the man refuses, he bears the same consequences as the woman—whether it's jail for abortion, prosecution for child abandonment, or whatever.
Ya think the right would go for that?
It's about time that all the falsity and prejudice of the anti-abortion proponents was brought to light.
11
Punishing a woman who has an abortion is doubling the penalty; a woman who is pregnant when it is dangerous to her or as a result of an attack is suffering enough.
You say in your argument, that if abortion = murder, then as with other murders, they should be punished. However, most repel at the idea of punishing women who have abortions and abortion must, therefore, not be murder.
What you are doing is to obscure what abortion truly is.
Do not be mistaken, it may not be murder in legal terms, but it is the ending of a life. Look at an early ultrasound where there is movement and a heartbeat, then a little later when there are limb-buds, a face, and more. Do not fool yourself, that embryo/fetus inside the uterus is alive. What do doctors tell their patients who have a miscarriage-- "your pregnancy is no longer alive"
I know whereof I speak; I am an ob-gyn, who in his training performed abortions. In the pre-Roe v. Wade days in California, we rationalized that we were doing this to save the life of the mother who might do herself harm if allowed to continue the pregnancy. What folly! Now I see how terrible were these acts.
I do not believe that the way to end abortion is to punish women, or to scream at them across picket lines. Punishment is not the reason I am against abortion. I am convinced that it is the ending of a life and that is something that is rarely best, or right.
You say in your argument, that if abortion = murder, then as with other murders, they should be punished. However, most repel at the idea of punishing women who have abortions and abortion must, therefore, not be murder.
What you are doing is to obscure what abortion truly is.
Do not be mistaken, it may not be murder in legal terms, but it is the ending of a life. Look at an early ultrasound where there is movement and a heartbeat, then a little later when there are limb-buds, a face, and more. Do not fool yourself, that embryo/fetus inside the uterus is alive. What do doctors tell their patients who have a miscarriage-- "your pregnancy is no longer alive"
I know whereof I speak; I am an ob-gyn, who in his training performed abortions. In the pre-Roe v. Wade days in California, we rationalized that we were doing this to save the life of the mother who might do herself harm if allowed to continue the pregnancy. What folly! Now I see how terrible were these acts.
I do not believe that the way to end abortion is to punish women, or to scream at them across picket lines. Punishment is not the reason I am against abortion. I am convinced that it is the ending of a life and that is something that is rarely best, or right.
1
But you, in your compassion, have no problem telling the woman she must endure the pregnancy and bear the child.
1
Would u then agree the man should face equal consequences. Be consistent here.
1
I am not advocating punishment for abortion. My only argument was that the original article tried to make abortion less than it is--the termination of a live fetus/embryo.
Great essay! Scary too.
It certainly makes sense that if the so-called "ProLife" movement gets its way, this is the logical next step.
If the Lifers are going to rely on pseudo science and Biblical passages to make their argument, so can I. And my logic is based on some heavy hitters.
The foetus only has the soul of a plant in the earliest stages of development, and only the soul of a clam in the middle stages. The actual breath of life only inheres in the baby when the divine breath of doG mixes with the coronary vital spirit and is filtered/cooked through the rete mirabile on its way to the brain. Everybody knows this if they read St. Thomas Aquinas, reflecting Avicenna, reflecting Galin, reflecting Aristotle/Plato, with a pinch of Genesis. Duh. This can only occur with a fully functioning heart, which a foetus/embryo does not have until shortly before birth.
It certainly makes sense that if the so-called "ProLife" movement gets its way, this is the logical next step.
If the Lifers are going to rely on pseudo science and Biblical passages to make their argument, so can I. And my logic is based on some heavy hitters.
The foetus only has the soul of a plant in the earliest stages of development, and only the soul of a clam in the middle stages. The actual breath of life only inheres in the baby when the divine breath of doG mixes with the coronary vital spirit and is filtered/cooked through the rete mirabile on its way to the brain. Everybody knows this if they read St. Thomas Aquinas, reflecting Avicenna, reflecting Galin, reflecting Aristotle/Plato, with a pinch of Genesis. Duh. This can only occur with a fully functioning heart, which a foetus/embryo does not have until shortly before birth.
7
Although I am a Christian and would not have an abortion unless forced to because of a tubal pregnancy, for example, I cannot force my beliefs on others who do not believe as I do. No one will force me to have an abortion. I need to give those who do not believe that life begins before birth the same rights as I have. Jesus never forced his beliefs on anyone. As his followers, we must do the same.
Actually after birth which is when the ductus arteriosus closes. But you're point is excellent.
1
If we are releasing crack dealers from prison then it does not make sense to send anyone to prison for abortion.
1
On the Charlie Rose show the other night, Kellyanne Conway just kept repeating..."woman are the victims". No, woman are members of the human race who simply want to be treated with dignity and respect and to have the right to make their own choices over what happens to their own bodies.
15
At 14th street and Fifth Avenue there is a sign that there is a $400 penalty for honking a horn.
Can the life of a fetus be worth LESS than honking a horn?
In America it can.
Can the life of a fetus be worth LESS than honking a horn?
In America it can.
7
Every anti-choice politician should answer questions about whether they themselves or past partners have had an abortion
Obviously Trump is sinically lying about being anti-abortion. Google his interview with Howard Stern to hear what he actually thinks about abortion in practice
http://occupydemocrats.com/2016/04/01/bombshell-trump-admits-urged-mistr...
Obviously Trump is sinically lying about being anti-abortion. Google his interview with Howard Stern to hear what he actually thinks about abortion in practice
http://occupydemocrats.com/2016/04/01/bombshell-trump-admits-urged-mistr...
3
Trump is playing the game of double jeapardy of women in some scenarios.
For example, if a female gets raped and then has an abortion, she suffers twice: once by the rapist, and once by Donald Trump.
For example, if a female gets raped and then has an abortion, she suffers twice: once by the rapist, and once by Donald Trump.
1
Donald Trump was merely pointing out the logical actions of the law if republicans get their way, making abortion illegal.
1
If abortion are made illegal then break that law should be a criminal offence punishable by jail. I mean if it is against the law, they break it, they are criminals. Put in them in jail. Build more privatized prisons. Just think of the money the investors can make. If we can figure out how to only apply the law to poor and black people that would be even better. (
3
I am really happy to see this column, and I suspect there are or will be others like it. Inadvertently, or perhaps intentionally, Donald Trump didn't give "his primary opponents a gift", he exposed the hypocrisy of much of the anti-abortion movement: IF abortion is murder, the women who participate in it are not temporarily insane, not victims; they are murderers. They are just as culpable as the doctors they hire to help them. If this is not true, then abortion is not murder.
8
Please tell me why a "murderer" should go free ... unless abortion is not murder (as we have been told it is for 40 years), and then it becomes clear that the anti-abortion movement is just politics and an effort to impose a shariah type law on all non-believers.
7
How about this for mind bending.
Situation 1: A mother and fetus are killed by a drunk driver. Drunk charged with murder of 2 people.
Situation 2: Women has an abortion, no charges against the women.
So in essence, the desire of the mother to keep or remove the child is what gives the fetus/child value.
Is not value, intrinsic worth, innate and not dependent on others desires?
Situation 1: A mother and fetus are killed by a drunk driver. Drunk charged with murder of 2 people.
Situation 2: Women has an abortion, no charges against the women.
So in essence, the desire of the mother to keep or remove the child is what gives the fetus/child value.
Is not value, intrinsic worth, innate and not dependent on others desires?
4
Trump takes to republican politics like Gob Bluth takes to illusions. Which is to say, whenever he attempts to blow the dog whistle, he just ends up saying what he means in the human hearing range. Abortion, xenophobia, racism, you name it, and he will expose the true beliefs in plain english before he knows what hes done.
3
I'm pro-choice but my immediate reaction to the latest Trump furor was that assuming women seeking abortions are "victims" is extremely condescending. I also take Trump's "mis-speaking" as an indication that he is a new convert to the anti-abortion movement. Trump is a politically incorrect buffoon who doesn't have a chance against Clinton or Sanders but I prefer him to Cruz and Kasich.
5
Hypocrisy of the radical right exposed! What the NY Times seems oblivious to is that the left (which, in its entirety is radical) is just as hypocritical and nonsensical. The silent majority (who represent the vast proportion of people in this country) are not radical ideologues. Unfortunately, the writers and editors at the NY Times do not fall into that vast proportion of the population. Instead, the intellectuals at the NYT lecture to the rest of us on a daily basis. Too bad....
2
There are many ways to mitigate abortion - comprehensive sex Ed, readily available contraception, universal health care, strong social safet net, etc.. The Netherlands employs all these and their abortion rates are about half of those in the U.S..
The GOP once again has only one tool in their tool box and it's one of the least effective - for reducing abortions. Very effective for vilifying women who have the audacity to want to control their bodies and lives.
The GOP once again has only one tool in their tool box and it's one of the least effective - for reducing abortions. Very effective for vilifying women who have the audacity to want to control their bodies and lives.
160
And that is really the issue that has come out of the closet. Ever since the 1970's and the advent of the Women's movement, the far right has done everything it could to put women back into the kitchen. Women should have choices about how they live their lives. Its not up to the religious right to force them into roles they don't want to pay.
How about the more fundamental questiuon:
Why is one person's medical issue the business of someone else who has no family relationship, and may not even know the person seeking medical treatment?
Religious belief cannot be a reason because the Constitution prevents the imposition of religious belief through the law. Believe what you want in the quiet of your home or your church. Do not try to impose your belief on me, or I will do my best to impose my religious beliefs on you.
In simple terms, what gives YOU the right to interject yourself into my (or my wife's, my two daughters', my daugther-in-law's or my two graddaughters') medical issues if you are not my doctor and not a member of my family with a health care proxy signed by me?
If you want to butt into my medical issues or treatment, first show me ALL of your medical records. After I review them, I will tell you to go pound sand.
Why is one person's medical issue the business of someone else who has no family relationship, and may not even know the person seeking medical treatment?
Religious belief cannot be a reason because the Constitution prevents the imposition of religious belief through the law. Believe what you want in the quiet of your home or your church. Do not try to impose your belief on me, or I will do my best to impose my religious beliefs on you.
In simple terms, what gives YOU the right to interject yourself into my (or my wife's, my two daughters', my daugther-in-law's or my two graddaughters') medical issues if you are not my doctor and not a member of my family with a health care proxy signed by me?
If you want to butt into my medical issues or treatment, first show me ALL of your medical records. After I review them, I will tell you to go pound sand.
14
I am very thankful that the NY Times decided to wade into this issue this morning I got into an argument yesterday about this exact, troubling issue. I am a man, so I have no idea what it is like being pregnant, but I was in a relationship long ago during which I created a new life with my girlfriend; she decided (and I felt it only appropriate that he make the ultimate decision) to have an abortion, so I know at least some of the pain of having lost a child. It troubles me to this day. It was legal, and was handled very well by Planned Parenthood. I do wonder if abortion lost its legal status, why would it not be the case that a woman getting an abortion would not have committed a crime, along with the doctor that performed the surgery? How could one really argue otherwise? I would really love to see the NY Times enlist a person grounded in philosophy and logic write a piece that would walk us through how we might think about the legal ramifications of illegal abortion strictly on those terms. Obviously, the human part of this equation cannot be denied...women do certainly suffer already, but...legally...?
5
I am pretty sure from the gist of your post you lost the "s" in the (...). You meant to type (and I felt it only appropriate that she make the ultimate decision).
What does 'Pro-Life' really mean.... if it doesn't include respect for the planet.... for the poor.... for emigrants.... for the randomly incarcerated... for 'Black Lives'... for families of terrorists... and for the many others victimized by bad policy coming, mostly, from the Republicans?
Here's what it really means.... it's a chance to steal votes from that large group of people who are uncomfortable with legal abortion, so as to get support for the heinous, anti-human policies promoted from the right... It's cynical politics.
Abortion is NOT murder. It's a sad but often necessary and PERSONAL medical decision.
If we really wanted to cut way back on abortions, groups liked Planned Parenthood would be lauded and adequately funded, and access to the wide-variety of birth control options would be openly and freely discussed. And we would labor to correct the vile misunderstandings about sex, epitomized by ads for Cialis, Viagra, and the like...
Here's what it really means.... it's a chance to steal votes from that large group of people who are uncomfortable with legal abortion, so as to get support for the heinous, anti-human policies promoted from the right... It's cynical politics.
Abortion is NOT murder. It's a sad but often necessary and PERSONAL medical decision.
If we really wanted to cut way back on abortions, groups liked Planned Parenthood would be lauded and adequately funded, and access to the wide-variety of birth control options would be openly and freely discussed. And we would labor to correct the vile misunderstandings about sex, epitomized by ads for Cialis, Viagra, and the like...
11
Pregnant women who are drug dependent are being charged criminally in some states. In other Republican-controlled states, legislation is being proposed that specifically targets pregnant women who have addiction issues for criminal child abuse or fetal harm. In these states such women are not routinely referred to treatment, as is recommended by the CDC and American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology. See, for example: http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2014/04/17/304173789/tennessee-... .
So, pregnancy, punishment, and abortion do go hand in hand in the puritanical minds of those who want to make abortion illegal, despite their efforts to put the best "optics" on their protestation that they simply act out of love for women and children.
Mr. Trump unwittingly and shockingly actually spoke the truth. The proof of that truth is the emergence of punitive criminal laws in Republican-controlled state legislatures that subject pregnant women to jail for lesser "transgressions" than abortion.
So, pregnancy, punishment, and abortion do go hand in hand in the puritanical minds of those who want to make abortion illegal, despite their efforts to put the best "optics" on their protestation that they simply act out of love for women and children.
Mr. Trump unwittingly and shockingly actually spoke the truth. The proof of that truth is the emergence of punitive criminal laws in Republican-controlled state legislatures that subject pregnant women to jail for lesser "transgressions" than abortion.
14
Reminds me of the lyrics to an old song, Ain't nobody's business but my own.
It's a woman's decision, nobody else has a say in it.
Were it not for the religious right and hypocritical politicians abortion would be a freely given right.
Gloria Steinem said it best: If men got pregnant abortion would be a sacrament. Period!
It's a woman's decision, nobody else has a say in it.
Were it not for the religious right and hypocritical politicians abortion would be a freely given right.
Gloria Steinem said it best: If men got pregnant abortion would be a sacrament. Period!
9
Anti-choice is anti-democracy. Anti-choice denies the citizenship and privacy rights of all women. Anti choice/pro-fetus zealots want to establish their religion as the religion of the United States. Anti-choice are anti-women and pro-shariah law, Christian style. It is time for the Supreme Court to consider the anti-choice efforts as violations of the First and Fourth Amendments.
18
Anti-choice movement knows full well that if abortion is criminalized women will suffer and die from self-induced or illegal abortions. What they don't say in public is that they believe these women deserve that punishment, so it's fine, it's even a form of justice, to allow that to happen.
19
Trump simply doesn't know what he's talking about. Period. And It's curious we and the pundits apparently haven't figured that out yet. Otherwise why would we keep giving credence to the confused simplistic lacking in knowledge substance or awareness random cerebral burps that emanate from his mind and mouth. It's been clear from the beginning that the only topics with which he's familiar are real estate, marketing, making money--and mostly himself and his poll numbers. To hedonistic Trump, running for president is nothing more than an attempt to win the big prize and finally prove to his self-doubting/inferior-feeling ego that he's a winner--and not one of those "losers" he detests and disdains. So the fact that he's a top contender we're giving so much time to is absolutely befuddling and terrifying.
6
Do you agree with what he stated, that women should be punished also, then?
Actually it is the public that demands this coverage just like a train wreck is more interesting to most of us than the normal operation of that train. The sensational is our bread and butter that we think will give us meaning in life. and the media just supplies that sensation. The Roman Coliseum exists in our living rooms.
This essay is very direct and very well put.
9
Women (and especially mothers) are already punished with the lack of proper sex education, insurance covering birth control and women's health, maternity leave, restrictions on WIC and SNAP, pay issues, prisonment for lack of "proper care" for their fetuses, lack of child care, etc, etc. Punishment for abortions maybe at the top of the list, but it is part and parcel of an attitude that women of free agency who don't follow the prescribed path are not worthy of the benefits of society.
8
As long as the "baby" (fetus) is saved, then the pro-life supporters are fine. When the mother switches from having an abortion to keeping the baby, they are turned from "murderers" to women who have "seen the light." The goal of these protestors is not to punish the woman but to save the life they feel that they feel is being taken away from the world. When pro-life supporters say they would never back Donald Trump in punishing women who do go through with their abortions, they say it in a way that means, "We don't want to punish women for having abortions; We want laws to be created so women don't even get the opportunity to get to that point."
1
Don't we have laws against murder? If so, they don't seem to be preventing all murders.
Besides, there's always re-incarnation.
Besides, there's always re-incarnation.
Exactly!
Fortunately, I have a different opinion to start with...
Fortunately, I have a different opinion to start with...
Silly attempt to emotionalize. Abortion is killing an unborn person. Murder is killing a born person. Keep abortion safe, legal, and rare, and wake up to realize that America faces more critical problems to stop shoving under the rug.
6
"Abortion is killing an unborn person."
Except a fetus is NOT a person.
Abortion is safe and legal, and becoming increasingly less common, thanks to education – at least in the less-red states.
Indeed there are more critical issues ahead of us as nation, but Repubs are desperate to hang on to their one-issue voters, and prefer not to be pressed too hard on solutions to those other problems.
Except a fetus is NOT a person.
Abortion is safe and legal, and becoming increasingly less common, thanks to education – at least in the less-red states.
Indeed there are more critical issues ahead of us as nation, but Repubs are desperate to hang on to their one-issue voters, and prefer not to be pressed too hard on solutions to those other problems.
>>>>
We should thank Trump for exposing the truth, hidden logic and final objective of the GOP abortion ends.
While we are at it, we may have to thank him for annihilating Jeb and the other clowns. We may have to thank him for annihilating the entire GOP and making it much easier for the Dems, 2016.
Time will tell, but with this kind of production, we may have to create a holiday for him.
We should thank Trump for exposing the truth, hidden logic and final objective of the GOP abortion ends.
While we are at it, we may have to thank him for annihilating Jeb and the other clowns. We may have to thank him for annihilating the entire GOP and making it much easier for the Dems, 2016.
Time will tell, but with this kind of production, we may have to create a holiday for him.
5
To most of us it is obvious that a man must have been involved in getting a woman pregnant. Unless of course you believe in the immaculate conception. Or that a man can never ever be responsible. For making a baby or shooting his mouth off. Like The Donald.
And now that I think of it thus, it is all very clear. Aah! Thank you Donald for helping me understand these subtleties.
And now that I think of it thus, it is all very clear. Aah! Thank you Donald for helping me understand these subtleties.
5
I hope David Brooks reads this column, though I doubt he will. His response on NPR yesterday to Trump's statement was "...he hasn't thought very deeply, and he's cruel to those who are weak, and so both of those factors came up." So, David, are all women weak, or just the ones who choose abortion? If it's the latter, do you see them as "broken and wounded" as well, or are they people making decisions about their own bodies?
6
The part in all of this is WHY do others feel the need to stick their
noses where they have no place being, ever.
Pro-lifers, go do something useful ....... how about working to stop the wars where your sons and daughters march off to be killed and maimed.......for what??
But that form of murder is OK?? How is that pro-life??
So please, do not speak of pro-life until you speak of stopping wars that murder innocents.
The hypocrisy is ASTOUNDING!!
Good ladies of USA: NO man or woman has the right to monitor your uterus.
NO NOT EVER!!
noses where they have no place being, ever.
Pro-lifers, go do something useful ....... how about working to stop the wars where your sons and daughters march off to be killed and maimed.......for what??
But that form of murder is OK?? How is that pro-life??
So please, do not speak of pro-life until you speak of stopping wars that murder innocents.
The hypocrisy is ASTOUNDING!!
Good ladies of USA: NO man or woman has the right to monitor your uterus.
NO NOT EVER!!
4
Trump didn't misspeak. He gave a logical answer to Matthews' hypothetical question. No, I am not a Trump supporter - but you must admit the logic. Now let's continue. The woman can defend herself only by the usual assertion of lack of legal competency - insanity or other mental deficiency resulting in the inability to know right from wrong, or by otherwise proving that she was forced to submit against her will.
And there we have the heart of the no-choice movement (they are hardly "pro-life"): woman not only as victim, but as incompetent. Again, this logically follows from the notion of woman as property. A Handmaid's Tale - in a country with the Second Amendment. Now there's a story.
Donald Trump is the gift that keeps on giving. And this bell cannot be unrung, by tweets or otherwise. It's about time this kernel of truth was demonstrated for all to see. I would like to see Matthews interview Cruz and his ilk with his own brand of Firing Line: "Why not? Why not criminalize the woman? Are you saying she's incompetent? Of course you are." and let them blather on, digging the hole deeper and hastening their political demise and that of their party.
And there we have the heart of the no-choice movement (they are hardly "pro-life"): woman not only as victim, but as incompetent. Again, this logically follows from the notion of woman as property. A Handmaid's Tale - in a country with the Second Amendment. Now there's a story.
Donald Trump is the gift that keeps on giving. And this bell cannot be unrung, by tweets or otherwise. It's about time this kernel of truth was demonstrated for all to see. I would like to see Matthews interview Cruz and his ilk with his own brand of Firing Line: "Why not? Why not criminalize the woman? Are you saying she's incompetent? Of course you are." and let them blather on, digging the hole deeper and hastening their political demise and that of their party.
8
no wonder nothing ever gets done in america
they spend most of their time arguing about abortion
and th rest of it arguing about gay marriage
Freud would be most amused
they spend most of their time arguing about abortion
and th rest of it arguing about gay marriage
Freud would be most amused
5
Once again Trump lifts the veil on a broad swath of "conservative" hypocrisy. The one you describe extends to people who talk about abortion as a "holocaust" yet go one to say "but I certainly don't condone shootings and bombings of clinics and all that! No no no!" But how does "We must work within the system to change the system" apply when you're talking about the legally sanctioned murder of millions of babies? Either admit that you DO support violent resistance, or stop spewing absolutes that you manifestly do not believe just for maximum political effect.
1
Why would a woman want to have an abortion?
Does no-one want to say it? Pssst: Prostitution. Do you jail prostitutes and give Johns a free pass? Do women want to enable that argument? I doubt it.
But the right-to-lifers are making that argument.
But the right-to-lifers are making that argument.
Do all of these so-called pro-life people think they are God? Who are they to make judgments about other people's lives? Why do they think they have the right to regulate women's medical issues?
2
"#lovethemboth"?
To prevent a woman who is desperately seeking an abortion from obtaining one is not "love", but an arrogant perversion of it.
To prevent a woman who is desperately seeking an abortion from obtaining one is not "love", but an arrogant perversion of it.
174
"...she just doesn’t know what’s good for her" sums up smug paternalism and degrading misogyny of the pro-life movement. It's also the reason for opposition to the contraception mandate in the ACA. The RTL movement, and they must be mostly men, really want women to be barefoot and pregnant, with as little social and economic independence as possible.
1
Regardless of one's view on abortion, there is no doubt that when a fetus is aborted a human life is extinguished. Perhaps if abortion was made illegal a new category of crime, with minimal punishment for the mother, could be created by the lawmakers. It could be similar to our manslaughter laws.
1
"When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time."
- Maya Angelou
- Maya Angelou
6
Laws governing punishment ought not discriminate. Why not charge men with reckless endangerment or criminal negligence if they're proven through DNA to have caused an unwanted pregnancy?
2
Pro-life. Pro-family. Pro-choice.
It is that simple. Let's stop apologizing.
It is that simple. Let's stop apologizing.
3
Matthews lives in a world of hypotheticals, he is the king of what ifs.
The best way to answer a hypothetical question, is with another question. Trump fell for it, hook, line, and sinker. I'm surprised.
A more appropriate response would have been, "Gosnell was convicted of three counts of murder, at what point Chris, does late term abortion warrant a murder charge?" After all, your candidate supports abortion under any circumstance. Is it murder Chris?
The courts said yes.
The best way to answer a hypothetical question, is with another question. Trump fell for it, hook, line, and sinker. I'm surprised.
A more appropriate response would have been, "Gosnell was convicted of three counts of murder, at what point Chris, does late term abortion warrant a murder charge?" After all, your candidate supports abortion under any circumstance. Is it murder Chris?
The courts said yes.
3
We need a modern day Lysistrata. No more sex for Trump et al.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-nelson/no-more-sex-for-you-mr-tr_b_9...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-nelson/no-more-sex-for-you-mr-tr_b_9...
Bravo. Your anger shows, and it's certainly time we got angry at the self righteous zealots who really, deep down, hate women.
3
Brilliant use of irony. Like Jonathan Swift's 1729 essay "A Modest Proposal" which uses bitter irony and meticulous economic reasoning to suggest that the British eat Irish infants to resolve problems of hunger.
3
If any form of human life is so precious, even a fertilized egg, can you tell me why it is the so-called "pro-lifers" who are most vehemently for the death penalty? Hypocrisy at its best!
1
Very ugly indeed. To Ms. Pollitt, if you care about the life of an unborn child, you, ipso facto, do not care about the mother. Like most all pro-abortion voices, she does not address the central issue, which is that abortion ends a life.
Her too-thorough case for punishing mothers sounds like the rumblings of conscience. How about making a case for fathers having some responsibility?
Her too-thorough case for punishing mothers sounds like the rumblings of conscience. How about making a case for fathers having some responsibility?
Hunt, please stop clouding the issue with facts.
Ms. Pollitt is simply pointedly shining a light on the hypocrisy of so many in the pro-life camp: pro life regarding pregnancy; pro death penalty; anti contraception and sex education; and now the idea that a woman is a victim in the most intimate decision possible. You want to decrease the number of abortions? Focus on educating women (and their partners) how not to get pregnant and support contraception in the Affordable Care Act and organizations like Planned Parenthood which mostly do exactly that. Start early when kids are in their earliest teen years and stop pretending abstinence only is a viable education strategy for most. And finally respect freedom of religion in it's truest meaning: not imposing your religious views on others that have different views or no religious belief.
This is exactly the problem with forcing your feelings, values and views on someone else.
Unless all participants can be punished, your feelings, values and views are nothing more than that.
Unless all participants can be punished, your feelings, values and views are nothing more than that.
Anti-abortionists pretend sympathy for the mother while accusing her of murder. They want to be perceived as kindly and also want the women's vote. That's really mixed up. Of course, most of them haven't thought this through. They just think as they are told to think
6
I don't understand why they keep talking about abortion. This should be a non-issue. Roe vs Wade was passed 40 years ago, it will not be changed. Get on to bigger and more important things!
5
It's pro fetus not pro life. Once you become a girl you have zero rights. So the movement is not pro life at all.
I have begun to despair about our country. This is the country my father risked his life for fighting Nazi Germany as a forward observer. Half my family was murdered in the Holocaust. We are entertaining becoming ISIS
Ie theocratic dictatorship.
I am genuinely frightened.
I have begun to despair about our country. This is the country my father risked his life for fighting Nazi Germany as a forward observer. Half my family was murdered in the Holocaust. We are entertaining becoming ISIS
Ie theocratic dictatorship.
I am genuinely frightened.
8
Pro-fetus not pro-life is absolutely correct. I use the term "pro-birth" cause after that the message to the reluctant mother and child is "you're on your own sweetheart." One could also hypothesize that deep down the "pro-life movement is also one of anti-sex-for-pleasure or anything else not related to procreation.
If a woman seeks to murder her unborn child by having an abortion performed by a doctor, she is not complicit in a crime. But, republkianzxc having made it almost impossible for some women to get an abortion, if she attempts to abort the pregnancy herself the republikanzxc are eager to see to it that she will be prosecuted for murder because she's no longer a victim. Got it.
I watched Trump's interview w/ Matthews and honestly, as a woman, that should be a non-issue for him. What does he know about abortion? He should not have answered. I am not supporting a candidate solely based on their abortion views. As of now, I'm worried about the economy, domestic and foreign policies. ISIS worries me more than the person getting abortion. There are many bigger fishes to fry.
1
In a statement, Senator Ted Cruz of Texas said, “Being pro-life is not simply about the unborn child, it’s also about the mother.”
What Cruz meant to say was, "Being pro-life is not simply about the unborn child, it's about finding out if sand can glow in the dark."
What Cruz meant to say was, "Being pro-life is not simply about the unborn child, it's about finding out if sand can glow in the dark."
5
I think The Donald's sin was not what he said, but that he said it aloud, out of code.
What do the Republicans think "illegal" means? We know what it means, and The Donald just said it plain.
And the walk-back position, putting the doctors in jail - that's supposed to be better, somehow?
What do the Republicans think "illegal" means? We know what it means, and The Donald just said it plain.
And the walk-back position, putting the doctors in jail - that's supposed to be better, somehow?
6
Gee . . . I spent a whole day after Trump said "you have to ban it" and "punish" the woman, asking my friends: "Well, what's so bad about what he said? It's internally consistent. It's just taking to a logical conclusion what prohibition of abortion means." And they all looked at me aghast.
"Of *course we won't punish the women . . . " Well, why not? Why "of course"? If your rationale for limiting abortion is sound, then you ought to be punishing anyone who has anything to do with it.
Only thing is: your rationale for limiting abortion is not necessarily sound, your "safety of the woman" restrictions are often phony, and you've already done plenty to punish women who seek an abortion.
You just can't get it together to really stand for, and say, what you mean: you *mean to punish women, so why get so decidedly off the train when someone suggests you do it straight up?
"Of *course we won't punish the women . . . " Well, why not? Why "of course"? If your rationale for limiting abortion is sound, then you ought to be punishing anyone who has anything to do with it.
Only thing is: your rationale for limiting abortion is not necessarily sound, your "safety of the woman" restrictions are often phony, and you've already done plenty to punish women who seek an abortion.
You just can't get it together to really stand for, and say, what you mean: you *mean to punish women, so why get so decidedly off the train when someone suggests you do it straight up?
9
Once the Republicans seat a President and have control over both houses of Cogress, they absolutely will make it a federal crime to abort, never mind States Rights on this issue. You'd be foolish to think otherwise. They're only mad at Donald for letting the cat out of the bag, again.
8
Republican men apparently own women!
4
Akin to saying "CRUCIFY THEM, CRUCIFY THEM!"
When will Republicans ever learn?
When will Republicans ever learn?
6
Thank you once again, Katharine Pollitt, for your clear thinking on this topic.
4
THANK YOU. This might be the best editorial I've seen int he Times! The ONLY redeeming aspect of Trump's candidacy has been to inadvertently pull the veil off of the Republican parities ugly positions. I hope people are paying attention.
7
Let's keep in mind that one in three women have had or will have an abortion.
Let's keep in mind that this is true whether abortion is safe and legal or not.
ONE IN THREE WOMEN, WHETHER LEGAL OR NOT.
After he's done with the wall, Donald will need to build a lot of new prisons. Maybe we can get Mexico to pay.
Let's keep in mind that this is true whether abortion is safe and legal or not.
ONE IN THREE WOMEN, WHETHER LEGAL OR NOT.
After he's done with the wall, Donald will need to build a lot of new prisons. Maybe we can get Mexico to pay.
5
The anti-abortion groups, are one commenter stated so eloquently, a pretext for denying girls and women their lives. Pregnant girls and women are public objects to be shamed, debased, and punished. Death and prison for pregnant American girls and women are masochistic delights unspoken. May the Donald speak this truth forever.
7
If the arguments of the "pro-life" people -- concerning the status of a zygote -- had any credence, then the mother should be a to purchase an insurance policy for that zygote. I can't imagine any insurance company issuing a policy to insure a zygote.
If abortion were ever made illegal -- I hope we never see that day again -- then insurance companies should be forced to insure the zygote.
If abortion were ever made illegal -- I hope we never see that day again -- then insurance companies should be forced to insure the zygote.
11
Not only that. I've said for years that if an embryo is a child then it should be a tax deduction from the moment of conception. I've had 3 miscarriages. If those embryos were children I should be able to go back and file amended tax returns for the years they were in my womb. I have year to hear any Republican senator or congressman mention doing this to the tax code!
2
Katha, I grew in a strict vegetarian household. I did not even know anyone who ate meat. Killing animals was forbidden. Killing insects was done but with a sense of guilt and shame.
But when I came to the US to study I decided to conform and be a meat eater. It was very difficult at first, I had to push meat down with lots of ketchup. Eventually I managed to learn to eat meat.
And then I suddenly had a moment of enlightenment. I realized that the whites really were immoral. They had nuked Japan. They defoliated the forests of Vietnam. They had wiped out countless humans including in America, Australia and New Zealand. WHY imitate them by eating meat? I gave it up.
And the liberal whites, for all their concerns about lions and whales, were no different. They all ate meat and they supported the killing of the unborn.
Indeed they were PROUD of themselves because they "respected women" by allowing them to kill.
Then I realized that the white race is hopeless and the only hope for humanity is to prevent them from corrupting everyone else with their cynical and murderous ways.
Will humanity recover its humanity? Or is it gone forever?
But when I came to the US to study I decided to conform and be a meat eater. It was very difficult at first, I had to push meat down with lots of ketchup. Eventually I managed to learn to eat meat.
And then I suddenly had a moment of enlightenment. I realized that the whites really were immoral. They had nuked Japan. They defoliated the forests of Vietnam. They had wiped out countless humans including in America, Australia and New Zealand. WHY imitate them by eating meat? I gave it up.
And the liberal whites, for all their concerns about lions and whales, were no different. They all ate meat and they supported the killing of the unborn.
Indeed they were PROUD of themselves because they "respected women" by allowing them to kill.
Then I realized that the white race is hopeless and the only hope for humanity is to prevent them from corrupting everyone else with their cynical and murderous ways.
Will humanity recover its humanity? Or is it gone forever?
2
Trump learned from his "conservatism for dummies" book that if 20 school children were gunned down, the gun is never at fault, and the children are to be blamed.
By comparison, he computed that in case of rape, men are never at fault, and women are to be blamed.
Trump tried to be what he was not - a conservative, and lost.
By comparison, he computed that in case of rape, men are never at fault, and women are to be blamed.
Trump tried to be what he was not - a conservative, and lost.
5
Punishing women for abortions would be grossly unfair. Men are often very much to blame. Still, if women took their free birth control pills as directed, there would be few unwanted pregnancies. That's a simple truth that nobody says out loud because it 's not PC. But the reason that the pill is free is so that women will take them and take charge of their bodies. Too many are too casual about doing this.
1
Free birth control pills? Dream on... and get yourself some condoms or a vasectomy if you are so concerned about women getting pregnant. Pfft.
3
Thank you so much for this piece. It represents my exact thoughts on this entire affair the moment I started to hear the backlash from the antiabortion forces on what Trump said. The double-speak is so strong on the other side of the issue that it absolutely astounds me.
11
Since so much of the opposition to abortion is based in muddled right-wing religious ideas, it makes perfect sense that the woman should be mere collateral damage in the crusade to promote a zygote to citizenship. The major religions have already normalized the subjugation of women to male social power.
The myth of immaculate conception serves as a blueprint for this: do you think Mary wanted to get pregnant? Did God take her out to dinner and a movie first? No, she just woke up pregnant one day. So much for the rape exception.
The myth of immaculate conception serves as a blueprint for this: do you think Mary wanted to get pregnant? Did God take her out to dinner and a movie first? No, she just woke up pregnant one day. So much for the rape exception.
6
You confuse the Immaculate Conception with the Virgin Birth (as do many people). No that this has much to do with the topic.
An alternative take on the myth of immaculate conception may be had when you don't deny Mary agency. She was not a brainless vessel. Abortions were procured at the time, and as an unmarried woman, she certainly could have had one. She chose not to, probably because she had some idea what had happened. More interesting still is why God, who could create everything from nothing and Man from dust, chose to impregnate a human woman, much less a woman with God-given free will and the ability to choose. Perhaps God did so because to make his son partly human, what creates person hood, is not conception, but gestation and birth.
Trump unmasked the cruelty at the heart of the pro=life
construct on the issue of choice. If abortion is murder as
they claim, the woman is an accessory and so is the man
who impregnated her. But that position is toxic, so they
have to claim the woman is a victim, the impregnator gets
to walk, and clinics and doctors must be prosecuted and jailed.
The real target of course is Griswold, birth control, and
the enemy that is sex. Sex must be iniside marriage, just
like Trump, oh wait. The exception Trump stands for is to
save the life of the candidate.
Cruz and Kasich are no better on the issue.
if you cannot control your body, you are not equal and you
are not free.
construct on the issue of choice. If abortion is murder as
they claim, the woman is an accessory and so is the man
who impregnated her. But that position is toxic, so they
have to claim the woman is a victim, the impregnator gets
to walk, and clinics and doctors must be prosecuted and jailed.
The real target of course is Griswold, birth control, and
the enemy that is sex. Sex must be iniside marriage, just
like Trump, oh wait. The exception Trump stands for is to
save the life of the candidate.
Cruz and Kasich are no better on the issue.
if you cannot control your body, you are not equal and you
are not free.
9
Trump hit the nail on the head and showed pro-lifers to be the death squads that they will become. If they get their way and life is legislated to begin at conception than abortion is Murder in the first degree and will be treated as such. Anyone helping to get the abortion is an accomplice to first degree murder. That means doctors, parents, friends, anyone who knew and helped in the murder. And let us not forget -- we have the death penalty. Trump showed us a glimpse of the future. If you are a woman or love one -- be afraid
15
Until just a few decades ago, major hospitals across America had entire wings devoted to women suffering the aftermath of back-alley and self-induced abortions. Many died miserable deaths of sepsis or were rendered sterile from their attempts to have autonomy over their own lives. Women of child-bearing age have a lot more to offer American society beside their wombs. Do we really want to relegate them to playing Rissian Roulette with their health just because a minority of our fellow citizens choose to believe they have the authority to make others who don't subscribe to the same narrow beliefs suffer undo punishment?
11
The truth is that it is all about punishment for having sex. It is always about women having sex; always and forever. I'm am over 60 years old and in all that time I have meet only a few (3?) so call pro-lifers who really cared about the fetus (and then baby). The conversation always reveals that women will get away with it (having sex), they will avoid punishment (pregnancy), they will escape control
15
Finally, the truth of the anti-abortion movement is in print. Thank you.
I was stunned to hear the backlash to Mr. Trump's "punishment" statement on MSNBC last week. Trump was clearly correct. Many, if not all states, would enact laws to punish women who had abortions given the act were declared illegal. That is clear.
Those like Kasich and Cruz who deny that reality are spewing falsehoods. They spread the same manure that promises better government with lower taxes, higher wages without unions, or better teaching with higher class sizes.
People who commit Illegal acts are punished. Women who have abortions, if it is deemed illegal, will be punished. That is the truth.
I was stunned to hear the backlash to Mr. Trump's "punishment" statement on MSNBC last week. Trump was clearly correct. Many, if not all states, would enact laws to punish women who had abortions given the act were declared illegal. That is clear.
Those like Kasich and Cruz who deny that reality are spewing falsehoods. They spread the same manure that promises better government with lower taxes, higher wages without unions, or better teaching with higher class sizes.
People who commit Illegal acts are punished. Women who have abortions, if it is deemed illegal, will be punished. That is the truth.
13
I am pro-choice, because i feel it is a matter of privacy. But I agree totally here. The anti-abortion people are among the biggest hypocrites that walked the planet. Abortion is murder, then the murder should be punished, how can you let the woman who sought the termination off the hook? I also never understood how these same people can be so vehemently pro-death penalty. If you believe in the sanctity of life, it goes for all. Period. No ending of life can be justified. Why we are still debating pro-choice rights in this country is beyond me. It's was settled in 1975. Let's move on.
11
This is exactly right, and reveals an element of hypocrisy on the part of anti-abortion advocates. The woman is the prime mover in the decision to have an abortion. If the law said abortion was murder, the woman would be guilty. Anti-abortion groups are avoiding this reality because it would cost them support for their cause.
14
If all abortions are murder, as postulated by the GOP candidates...
That means women who spontaneously abort are murderers.
That means women who have spontaneously aborted more than once are serial killers.
If "life" starts at conception, that means pregnant women who absorb one or more fetuses of a multiple-fetus pregnancy are cannibals.
That means women who spontaneously abort are murderers.
That means women who have spontaneously aborted more than once are serial killers.
If "life" starts at conception, that means pregnant women who absorb one or more fetuses of a multiple-fetus pregnancy are cannibals.
9
Where on earth is the logic in this?
Trump misspoke because he is a dimwit and Chris Matthews had him tied up in knots from his earlier questions on the use of nuclear arms. Trump is so narcissistic that despite being told by Matthews that the standard answer for all candidates on the use of nuclear arms is "I'm not going to discuss the use of nuclear arms," Trump nevertheless continued to describe that he might use them and where. By the time the question on abortion came up, Trump was utterly confused and emotionally undone. His willingness to discuss the use of nuclear weapons is so much more important than the fact of his not knowing prescribed Republican dogma on punishing only those who perform abortions. Abortions can not be constitutionally outlawed in the US unless either the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade or there is an anti-abortion constitutional amendment. The argument on punishment is purely academic.
The important issue is Trump's personality disorders, his narcissistic, histrionic, and anti-social personality disorders getting in the way of making intelligent choices. If he cannot handle a tough interview with Chris Matthews, how will he handle a genuine crisis?
The important issue is Trump's personality disorders, his narcissistic, histrionic, and anti-social personality disorders getting in the way of making intelligent choices. If he cannot handle a tough interview with Chris Matthews, how will he handle a genuine crisis?
12
I find the views of those opposed to abortion lacking thoughtful and rational. A fetus may become a child or not survive. A majority of Christians disagree with abortion foes. If those opposed to abortion were as passionate the poor and downtrodden and justice.
3
At least Trump gets it: If abortion is murder, then those who seek out abortions are paying doctors for murder-for-hire.
As contemptible as Trump is, Ted Cruz is worse. He says abortion is murder in pretty much any instance, yet Cruz has bashed Trump for his comments and has said that "of course" women should not be punished for committing what he deems to be murder.
But this is par for the course for Cruz. The list of REAL crimes he's been willing to countenance in the name of career advancement and political expediency is pretty much endless.
As contemptible as Trump is, Ted Cruz is worse. He says abortion is murder in pretty much any instance, yet Cruz has bashed Trump for his comments and has said that "of course" women should not be punished for committing what he deems to be murder.
But this is par for the course for Cruz. The list of REAL crimes he's been willing to countenance in the name of career advancement and political expediency is pretty much endless.
14
If a female is not legally allowed to decide whether to terminate her pregnancy, she may legally be a reproductive slave, raped by a male and forced to bear his child. And, Mr. Trump, how about "punishment" for the man who impregnates the woman and abandons his responsibility to her and his child? If Donald Trump had become pregnant from his many self-acknowledged copulations, I wonder whether abortion would be so abhorrent to him?
22
Whatever one's position on abortion – I am not "for" it, but I believe that it's sometimes necessary as the lesser evil – we should really remember that the large majority of abortions are not because of rape or incest. When I was in the hospital for my first child, my roommate was a young woman who had had three abortions before finally having a baby. It may be anecdotal evidence, but she told me she had just never bothered with birth control, which seemed masochistic to me. When I was working in social services years ago, more than one woman told me that their husband/boyfriend wouldn't use condoms or that they themselves didn't like the "pill". While contraception is not 100% safe, it's pretty good insurance against unwanted pregnancy, and a bit of personal responsibility is not amiss. As the old adage says, "Prevention is the better part of cure."
If the fathers of the children were imprisoned for 20 years rather than the mother, I suspect we would be having a very different conversation.
31
What the press has failed to publicize is that Chris Matthews asked that question next: should the impregnators be held responsible in any way? What was Drimpf's response. NO. Why hasn't the media picked that up, because most of them are impregnators?
1
You write, "We take murder pretty seriously in this country, especially the murder of children, which is what the anti-abortion movement deems fertilized eggs, embryos and fetuses to be."
This statement is not necessarily true. All the people who die by gun violence need to be considered too. If we were a truly law abiding and considerate nation, we would give gun violence every bit as much attention as death by abortion.
The real question is, "What do you do when you have no place left to turn?" The consequences of an unplanned or unwanted child are life changing and too long lasting to be given a blanket condemnation of murder.
Abortion is too important to be politicized to the extent it currently is.
This statement is not necessarily true. All the people who die by gun violence need to be considered too. If we were a truly law abiding and considerate nation, we would give gun violence every bit as much attention as death by abortion.
The real question is, "What do you do when you have no place left to turn?" The consequences of an unplanned or unwanted child are life changing and too long lasting to be given a blanket condemnation of murder.
Abortion is too important to be politicized to the extent it currently is.
78
This latest Trump stumble has illuminated the inherent contradictions in the "right to life" position and revealed its utter lack of consistency. All the arguments are shown to be thin rationalizations covering their real beliefs: that women should not be sexually active outside of marriage (but by all means look the other way if men are), and that therefore women deserve punishment if they fail to adhere to Christian Sharia law by exercising the freedoms that men have.
10
I've never had an abortion because birth control works.
But I think that abortion, like the death penalty, is a necessary evil so I support the right to have an abortion.
But I have known several women with law degrees who had more than one abortion as a form of birth control. Which is stupid. So I do think that after multiple abortions there sound be sterilization. For men also.
But I think that abortion, like the death penalty, is a necessary evil so I support the right to have an abortion.
But I have known several women with law degrees who had more than one abortion as a form of birth control. Which is stupid. So I do think that after multiple abortions there sound be sterilization. For men also.
1
Perfectly stated, Ms. Pollitt.
It must be terrifying to be pregnant and unable to obtain an abortion.
But then, as always, there will be high-priced doctors who will terminate the pregnancies of wealthy women. I am sure that Mr. Trump's daughter has friends whose birth control methods failed, or who didn't use birth control, and who have had abortions. Ditto for other holier-than-thous in Congress.
Voila.
It must be terrifying to be pregnant and unable to obtain an abortion.
But then, as always, there will be high-priced doctors who will terminate the pregnancies of wealthy women. I am sure that Mr. Trump's daughter has friends whose birth control methods failed, or who didn't use birth control, and who have had abortions. Ditto for other holier-than-thous in Congress.
Voila.
9
There should be some legal penalty, but not for abortion. The penalty should be associated with irresponsible, thoughtless conception, for both the man and the woman. With all the great birth control methods available today- which should be free, available and aggressively taught early on and everywhere- abortion should almost never be needed, statistically speaking.
Modern medicine will soon be able to handle a premature delivery at four months. What does this tell us?
What kind of crazy specie of beast are we? How long will we continue to permit infanticide?
If you are either a religious person or an evolved humanitarian, abortion is wrong.
If you are neither, welcome to the dung heap.
Modern medicine will soon be able to handle a premature delivery at four months. What does this tell us?
What kind of crazy specie of beast are we? How long will we continue to permit infanticide?
If you are either a religious person or an evolved humanitarian, abortion is wrong.
If you are neither, welcome to the dung heap.
Penalty for failed birth control? Absurd.
2
Republicans want abortion to unavailable to the "other" people - mostly less well off, less educated, undeserving women who don't have the self control to not have sex or not get pregnant. But the want abortion available for their own wives, daughters, and mistresses who find themselves in exceptional circumstances that make an abortion desirable.
They don't want their own women to face criminal charges when they fly off from Texas to New York or Europe to have their abortions.
They don't want their own women to face criminal charges when they fly off from Texas to New York or Europe to have their abortions.
14
When does a human life begin? Immediately upon exit from the womb, or only after the cord is cut?
This issue has become viciously political and simplified much like the gun argument. There seem to be only extremes.
I am pro choice and pro life. In my opinion women has a right to choose abortion up until it is determined by the medical establishment that the unborn child could survive if removed from the womb, including the use of medical technology. After that point, abortion is the taking of a human life and should be treated accordingly.
This is a complex subject and deserves better than simplistic thinking and labels
This issue has become viciously political and simplified much like the gun argument. There seem to be only extremes.
I am pro choice and pro life. In my opinion women has a right to choose abortion up until it is determined by the medical establishment that the unborn child could survive if removed from the womb, including the use of medical technology. After that point, abortion is the taking of a human life and should be treated accordingly.
This is a complex subject and deserves better than simplistic thinking and labels
7
A very sensible standpoint!
Trump as usual spoke the unpalatable truth. Of course the next step is prosecution, especially if a black market for mifepristone develops. Abortion is pretty easy as a DYI project if there are dealers available.
We are not going to resolve the philosophical debate - and it is a philosophical debate - over the determination of precisely when on the continuum from zygote to birth, we create personhood, a soul, a being deserving of full legal protections.
We can only compromise - such as granting broader protections after viability - and leave the moral agency to the woman. Because criminalizing abortion creates criminals.
We are not going to resolve the philosophical debate - and it is a philosophical debate - over the determination of precisely when on the continuum from zygote to birth, we create personhood, a soul, a being deserving of full legal protections.
We can only compromise - such as granting broader protections after viability - and leave the moral agency to the woman. Because criminalizing abortion creates criminals.
1
The message to women is really this: you had sex; now you have to suffer the consequences. Nothing else matters. Using children as punishment is reprehensible enough. Treating women as nothing but instruments of reproduction is worse. As the philosopher Immanuel Kant said, it is immoral to treat a person as a means rather than an end in herself. Every woman has the right to decide such an important issue for herself, one that will affect every aspect of her life. As a born person, she has hopes, dreams, responsibilities, and––above all––the right to self-determination. None of this applies to a zygote, embryo, or fetus.
21
The pro-life argument has all kinds of logical problems. One of the biggest, to me, is this:
About 50-75% of fertilized eggs don't make it to term, in the best of circumstances. Perhaps 1/3 don't even implant successfully in the mother (and it takes them 7 days or so before they are even attached to the mother at all.) Of those that do attach, another third or more are lost in the first trimester.
If your definition of life is a fertilized egg (because it is genetically distinct, I suppose), then women who are actively trying to get pregnant are guilty of involuntary manslaughter. What about all those lost lives? Why aren't we doing more for them?
The legal reality of that policy would be absurdity.
About 50-75% of fertilized eggs don't make it to term, in the best of circumstances. Perhaps 1/3 don't even implant successfully in the mother (and it takes them 7 days or so before they are even attached to the mother at all.) Of those that do attach, another third or more are lost in the first trimester.
If your definition of life is a fertilized egg (because it is genetically distinct, I suppose), then women who are actively trying to get pregnant are guilty of involuntary manslaughter. What about all those lost lives? Why aren't we doing more for them?
The legal reality of that policy would be absurdity.
9
Thank you for this essay, and for stressing the way the anti-abortion movement both infantilizes women and blames them for having sex. I'll add that if abortion is murder, the 1 in 5 miscarriages that occur naturally in this country need to be investigated, for when it comes to a miscarriage, there's nothing prima facie that says it was natural.
People who are opposed to abortion because they believe in "the preciousness of life" sentimentalize life as a whole, are are very selective in their target. Are they pacifists? They should be. War makes clear that all life isn't precious, for armies knowingly kill innocent babies, children and non-combatants along with enemy forces. We "justify" this in the name of larger causes.
I'm a radical pro-abortion rights woman who acknowledges that abortion is killing a potential life. But there are many times when killing a potential life is better than the alternative. My mantra is, Let the woman decide.
People who are opposed to abortion because they believe in "the preciousness of life" sentimentalize life as a whole, are are very selective in their target. Are they pacifists? They should be. War makes clear that all life isn't precious, for armies knowingly kill innocent babies, children and non-combatants along with enemy forces. We "justify" this in the name of larger causes.
I'm a radical pro-abortion rights woman who acknowledges that abortion is killing a potential life. But there are many times when killing a potential life is better than the alternative. My mantra is, Let the woman decide.
15
This week's discussion shows that, no, we do not honestly consider a fetus to be a full human being.
Because, if there's no difference between a fetus and a person, and if abortion is murder, then there can be no exceptions for rape or incest and the woman seeking the abortion must be punished as a murderer. And people know in their hearts that that's excessive, that an abortion is quite different from a murder.
Our culture has never really regarded a fetus as a person. An early-term miscarriage is not given a name, a funeral, or a burial. It is not entered into the family tree.
Right-wingers have been pushing to stop abortion not because they truly believe it's murder but because they don't like women having sex without punishing consequences. (Hence the exceptions for rape or incest.) If what they truly cared about was preventing abortions, they'd be handing out birth control to low-income women as fast as they could.
Because, if there's no difference between a fetus and a person, and if abortion is murder, then there can be no exceptions for rape or incest and the woman seeking the abortion must be punished as a murderer. And people know in their hearts that that's excessive, that an abortion is quite different from a murder.
Our culture has never really regarded a fetus as a person. An early-term miscarriage is not given a name, a funeral, or a burial. It is not entered into the family tree.
Right-wingers have been pushing to stop abortion not because they truly believe it's murder but because they don't like women having sex without punishing consequences. (Hence the exceptions for rape or incest.) If what they truly cared about was preventing abortions, they'd be handing out birth control to low-income women as fast as they could.
30
No, I think many of them do truly believe it is murder, but they have never been faced with the logic of that position. They get by talking nonsense that even they would not support if they examined it.
Context matters, of course.
If an otherwise healthy woman had an abortion at, for example, 34 weeks of gestation of an otherwise healthy fetus than Mr. Trump and Ms Pollitt are correct -- the doctor should be charged with murder and the mother should be charged as an accomplice to murder.
According to the CDC, 92% of abortions occur prior to week 13 of gestation – the majority prior to 8 weeks. None of these fetuses are viable and hence no crime has been committed by either the woman or the doctor. Only 1.3% of abortions occur greater than 21 weeks of gestation. Of note, the abortion rate (number per 1000 women) was 7.7% for whites, 27.8% for blacks, 15% for Hispanics in the latest CDC report. Research has shown that providing contraception for women at no cost increases use of the most effective methods and can reduce abortion rates. Removing cost as a barrier and increasing access to the most effective contraceptive methods can help to reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and consequently the number of abortions performed in the United States. This appears to be especially needed in the black community.
If an otherwise healthy woman had an abortion at, for example, 34 weeks of gestation of an otherwise healthy fetus than Mr. Trump and Ms Pollitt are correct -- the doctor should be charged with murder and the mother should be charged as an accomplice to murder.
According to the CDC, 92% of abortions occur prior to week 13 of gestation – the majority prior to 8 weeks. None of these fetuses are viable and hence no crime has been committed by either the woman or the doctor. Only 1.3% of abortions occur greater than 21 weeks of gestation. Of note, the abortion rate (number per 1000 women) was 7.7% for whites, 27.8% for blacks, 15% for Hispanics in the latest CDC report. Research has shown that providing contraception for women at no cost increases use of the most effective methods and can reduce abortion rates. Removing cost as a barrier and increasing access to the most effective contraceptive methods can help to reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and consequently the number of abortions performed in the United States. This appears to be especially needed in the black community.
11
I thought the most important point came from Chris Matthews (lost on Donald Trump) when he quoted Christ distinguishing between the duties we owe to religion and those we owe to the State: "Render unto Caesar ... and render unto God ..." .
American Christians should understand that their code of conduct is personal, is theirs, and they owe that duty to God - but that they have other equal responsibilities: to respect and defend the plurality of beliefs in their country.
We each answer for our own conscience, we all answer to the law; do not confuse our law with your conscience.
.
American Christians should understand that their code of conduct is personal, is theirs, and they owe that duty to God - but that they have other equal responsibilities: to respect and defend the plurality of beliefs in their country.
We each answer for our own conscience, we all answer to the law; do not confuse our law with your conscience.
.
15
The discussion about abortion is generally characterized by a high form of blindness on both sides of the issue.
1) THOSE WHO ARE FOR ABORTION: never look at ultrasound images of a fetus in months 8 and 9 and focus only on the notion that it's a piece of tissue that can be scraped off, at the beginning of a pregnancy.
2) THOSE WHO ARE AGAINST ABORTION: never look at images of the early tissue state of the fetus at the beginning of a pregnancy and focus only on the ultrasound images of a fetus in months 8 and 9.
And then they scream hysterical accusations at each other, especially if the person expressing an opinion is a man.
1) THOSE WHO ARE FOR ABORTION: never look at ultrasound images of a fetus in months 8 and 9 and focus only on the notion that it's a piece of tissue that can be scraped off, at the beginning of a pregnancy.
2) THOSE WHO ARE AGAINST ABORTION: never look at images of the early tissue state of the fetus at the beginning of a pregnancy and focus only on the ultrasound images of a fetus in months 8 and 9.
And then they scream hysterical accusations at each other, especially if the person expressing an opinion is a man.
3
The number of women who have an abortion of a viable fetus at 8 or 9 months is nil. Four out of five women who become pregnant endeavor to bring their pregnancies to term, even when it kills them. That's why there are over 7 billion people on earth right now. The one out of five who has an abortion does so before the end of the first trimester 92% of the time; an ultrasound of a nearly-full term fetus doesn't enter into it. Women know what being pregnant means. Trust women.
1
Another point about the pity-the-mother/anti-choice crowd is that they sharply distinguish the mother who murders a new-born for any reason at all from the pregnant woman who gets an abortion. Most people would treat infanticide as a criminal act; yet nearly all the anti-choice folks reject punishing the mother who procures an abortion. For some reason, that common-sense distinction never seems to lead them to think that just possibly abortion is not the same thing morally as infanticide.
92
Well spoken. You're absolutely right -- if we condemn abortion as "murder", then we should have no equivocations and punish the pregnant woman, too. It's the euphemisms and double-speak around this issue that cloud its clarity, I think. Thank you for this piece.
165
Yeah. What jkk said.
While punishing the woman, don't forget to punish the man who got her pregnant.
Maybe the punishment shouldn't be 10 years in jail, but something. Maybe the fine shouldn't be 6 months wages, but some wages. If the law is that abortion is murder or illegal that is.
An admonition by a judge as punishment? An admonition by the priest?
What about the man in all this? In some countries the woman is stoned. What about the man?
An admonition by a judge as punishment? An admonition by the priest?
What about the man in all this? In some countries the woman is stoned. What about the man?
Religious objection (which should preclude it from civil deliberation) to abortion is the Commandment "Thou shalt not murder unlawfully." The Commandment does not distinguish victims by age. The Commandment does infer lawful reasons and authority for murder. So, we're only debating "Who gets to decide, and murder lawfully?"
In the U.S., the State reserves the right to decide who gets to murder lawfully. The State is not tasked to prove moral superiority of its chosen actors. The State merely asserts authority. So, who gets to murder "lawfully?"
Soldiers and their commanders. Police and courts. Civilians in self-defense. Civilians in "Stand your ground" states. These are all granted Choice and Agency. But pregnant women, no. On what basis are pregnant women morally inferior to these others? Some people simply assert that this is so. Nature and society elect to conceive, gestate, bear and raise our young. But women are not deemed morally capable of choosing whether or not to do so, with no proof of moral inferiority to others granted the right to "murder lawfully." And let us not argue about innocent life. How much "collateral damage" are we willing to accept in policing and war (Including killing pregnant women.)? Apparently, there is no limit.
A true pro-life Christian would not risk their immortal soul by assuming the office of President, Mr. Cruz (Or any civil office, for that matter.). Your God didn't write the Constitution. How can you afford the eternal risk?
In the U.S., the State reserves the right to decide who gets to murder lawfully. The State is not tasked to prove moral superiority of its chosen actors. The State merely asserts authority. So, who gets to murder "lawfully?"
Soldiers and their commanders. Police and courts. Civilians in self-defense. Civilians in "Stand your ground" states. These are all granted Choice and Agency. But pregnant women, no. On what basis are pregnant women morally inferior to these others? Some people simply assert that this is so. Nature and society elect to conceive, gestate, bear and raise our young. But women are not deemed morally capable of choosing whether or not to do so, with no proof of moral inferiority to others granted the right to "murder lawfully." And let us not argue about innocent life. How much "collateral damage" are we willing to accept in policing and war (Including killing pregnant women.)? Apparently, there is no limit.
A true pro-life Christian would not risk their immortal soul by assuming the office of President, Mr. Cruz (Or any civil office, for that matter.). Your God didn't write the Constitution. How can you afford the eternal risk?
20
On what basis are women wanting an abortion morally inferior to a soldier, a police officer, the court or someone "standing their ground" against a crime? Really? All your logic and knowledge doesn't take you to the conclusion that these other people and institutions have an identified enemy? And while your Christians shouldn't run for President thought is interesting, I would say your knowledge of their foundational Great Commission principle (spread the gospel to all nations) lacks the same logical clarity as your first set of assumptions.
When did the Almighty change His Commandant?
It read, "Thou shall not kill" when I was indoctrinated...
It read, "Thou shall not kill" when I was indoctrinated...
Robert Eller -- Few people understand the actual words of that Commandment in the original language. You're right, and it is good to see it explained.
1
This argument is so tiring and how telling that most pro-life/anti abortion advocates are men, who will never go through the discomfort/danger of pregnancy or the exquisite pain of childbirth. I am a mother of five children and was diagnosed with gestational diabetes in my last two pregnancies. Both pregnancies were the result of contraception failure. Fortunately I was able to control the diabetes through diet but I was told by my doctor that I more likely than not would develop full blown type 2 diabetes at some point in my life. This is just one of the very real health consequences of pregnancy.
I now suffer severe back pain due to the stress that pregnancy puts on ones back muscles and have prominent stretch marks that in winter chafe and bleed.
Although I personally could not choose abortion unless under the most dire circumstances the key word here is CHOICE. Who am I to judge someone else's situation and force a child on them? The only person who truly knows if she is capable of all of the demands of parenting and the lifetime commitment to it is the mother. You are a parent until you die. The responsibility, heartbreak and worry don't end when your child reaches adulthood. It truly is a lifetime commitment.
I'm sure we'll hear from the know nothings who believe that all pregnancies occur from irresponsibility because in their alternate universe contraception NEVER fails and only loose women have unintended pregnancies. Pregnancy is punishment. You play you must pay!
I now suffer severe back pain due to the stress that pregnancy puts on ones back muscles and have prominent stretch marks that in winter chafe and bleed.
Although I personally could not choose abortion unless under the most dire circumstances the key word here is CHOICE. Who am I to judge someone else's situation and force a child on them? The only person who truly knows if she is capable of all of the demands of parenting and the lifetime commitment to it is the mother. You are a parent until you die. The responsibility, heartbreak and worry don't end when your child reaches adulthood. It truly is a lifetime commitment.
I'm sure we'll hear from the know nothings who believe that all pregnancies occur from irresponsibility because in their alternate universe contraception NEVER fails and only loose women have unintended pregnancies. Pregnancy is punishment. You play you must pay!
419
Thank you for sharing your story. Thirty years ago, I worked with a woman who had 3 kids under the age of 5. She and her husband took their 3 children to the Planned Parenthood clinic each Saturday to protest abortions. She became pregnant with her 4th and called me in the middle of the night sobbing because she knew that physically, emotionally and financially she was unable to have another child. She begged me to go with her to Planned Parenthood. She wanted them to perform an abortion on the spot which they would not do. They asked her to think about for several days given her background. They were afraid she would regret her actions. A week later, she went back in for the abortion. She did not ever tell her husband she had been pregnant.
Unwanted pregnancies are such an intensely emotional, personal issue. There is no good answer, no good alternatives, they are all painful. To have to also deal with the outside interference of others who have no knowledge of one's individual circumstances is "cruel and unusual." Imagine having to face the same roadblocks for any other health issue.
Unwanted pregnancies are such an intensely emotional, personal issue. There is no good answer, no good alternatives, they are all painful. To have to also deal with the outside interference of others who have no knowledge of one's individual circumstances is "cruel and unusual." Imagine having to face the same roadblocks for any other health issue.
3
MEN. They have no vote here. Trump even spoke his truth - women should be punished, but NOT men. There. This subject belongs to women because there is no comfort in the present law allowing us to decide for ourselves, state law, right to life advocates, and even the supremes threaten what was won. If the outcome of a joint venture, chosen or not, is viable, livable, sustainable. Sex is the base and we are incapable of starting there, unable to even agree upon education, much less contraception. We are a muddled and confused people on the most basic human function. Women have struggled since the beginning of time to handle on their own an unwanted pregnancy and we must continue the struggle now. It is ours alone.
1
In my pro-life movement many of the members are women with a sufficient number of men. Most are mothers and fathers who feel abortion is immoral and the destruction of innocent life. They are highly educated and well spoken and take life seriously. They are passionate about this issue but extremely caring. Maybe you should spend an hour or so with us one day and your opinion will change. We are not a group of know nothings but well read individuals. We are not monsters bit kind individuals who want to protect life. What is so horrible about that?
Forgive me for being skeptical about when else life can be deemed to begin if not at conception. Conception is the sine qua non regarding life. How can one argue otherwise? Although a baby conceived through rape or incest is no less a precious life, I do understand that it would be cruel to insist that a woman continue with her pregnancy under those cicunstances. And I support abortion when a woman's life is at risk. But the vast majority of abortions are given to women whose birth control failed or who didn't bother to take any precautions, and that is repugnant. Everyone knows that having sex can lead to pregnancy -- to the creation of life. Why should a woman be permitted to take a life because she took a risk? And by the way, I am female and otherwise fall on the left end of the political spectrum. Show me a tree, I'll hug it; show me any animal and I'll fight to protect it. I support gay marriage and loathe guns. I'm somewhat religious, if such a state exists, but I'm Protestant and nowhere near being an evangelical. I simply feel that life is precious, that putting oneself in the position of becoming a parent is an act that should be treated with reverence, and that women in America have all the information and support they need to keep from becoming pregnant or, failing that, to accept their moral responsibility in creating life.
Most abortion procedures are for young women, many in their teens, without access to contraception, often with little or no sex education, too often forced to have sex with a boyfriend who says "prove you love me." Many abortions for women who are 21 or older stem from contraceptive failure, malfunction, forced sex while intoxicated, asleep or unconscious. Other factors include broken relationships, abandonment (because of the pregnancy), Male pressure, family pressure or stress.
The vast majority of abortions are sought by Catholic women for whom an unwanted, unwedded, stigmatized baby carries severe religious consequences. Sex education and easy access to contraception has been proven to cut the abortion rate given the preponderance of teen pregnancies.
But adult discomfort with sex invariably leads too many to think if contraception were banned and teens were deprived of sex education, they won't have sex and no more abortions. Abstinence is still taught in too many states as the only sex education curriculum, and with the GOP war against Planned Parenthood -- the nation's leading positive sex educator and primary source of contraception -- teen pregnancy will rise again and so will abortions.
Your assumptions that women, younger women in particular, know about sex, can access contraception, have learned strategies to deflect male pressure, are mistaken.
The vast majority of abortions are sought by Catholic women for whom an unwanted, unwedded, stigmatized baby carries severe religious consequences. Sex education and easy access to contraception has been proven to cut the abortion rate given the preponderance of teen pregnancies.
But adult discomfort with sex invariably leads too many to think if contraception were banned and teens were deprived of sex education, they won't have sex and no more abortions. Abstinence is still taught in too many states as the only sex education curriculum, and with the GOP war against Planned Parenthood -- the nation's leading positive sex educator and primary source of contraception -- teen pregnancy will rise again and so will abortions.
Your assumptions that women, younger women in particular, know about sex, can access contraception, have learned strategies to deflect male pressure, are mistaken.
6
Life begins at birth..legally and religiously. We never celebrate conception day. There is no sacrament for conception. It is the miracle of birth that makes a person. The soul enters the body at birth. A fetus is and has never been a baby.
Exactly right. The logic is inescapable. If abortion is murder, a woman who pays for an abortion is no different than a woman who hires someone to kill her child. A woman who self-aborts, either medically or with a coat hanger, is no different than a woman drowns her newborn baby in the toilet.
It may be uncomfortable to face, but this is inescapable result of following antiabortion arguments to their logical conclusions. If abortion is murder, as is claimed, to allow women who have abortions to escape the full force of the law--lengthy prison sentences, or even the death penalty in states that still have it--would be a gross miscarriage of justice.
Do we really want to go there?
It may be uncomfortable to face, but this is inescapable result of following antiabortion arguments to their logical conclusions. If abortion is murder, as is claimed, to allow women who have abortions to escape the full force of the law--lengthy prison sentences, or even the death penalty in states that still have it--would be a gross miscarriage of justice.
Do we really want to go there?
7
It seems everyone is horrified at the thought that a woman would be punished for having an abortion. Apparently many are in denial. The pro-life movement which is supported by the GOP asserts from the moment of conception the fetus must be recognized as a human with all the rights of the born (out of the womb). Therefore, an abortion at any stage of development / pregnancy is murder of a human. And yes, we punish murderers. Every person gives much thought, making it premeditated murder.
Denial has become a trademark response of the GOP. Whether denying climate change or denying the many varied services provided by Planned Parenthood or denying / rejecting recognition of the millions insured under the ACA or denying the logical consequence of the pro-life position. The policy of denial has been convenient for the GOP, but tragic for this nation - even the world community.
Denial has become a trademark response of the GOP. Whether denying climate change or denying the many varied services provided by Planned Parenthood or denying / rejecting recognition of the millions insured under the ACA or denying the logical consequence of the pro-life position. The policy of denial has been convenient for the GOP, but tragic for this nation - even the world community.
13
Forgive me for being skeptical about when else life can be deemed to begin if not at conception. Conception is the sine qua non regarding life. How can one argue otherwise? Although a baby conceived through rape or incest is no less a precious life, I do understand that it would be cruel to insist that a woman continue with her pregnancy under those cicunstances. And I support abortion when a woman's life is at risk. But the vast majority of abortions are given to women whose birth control failed or who didn't bother to take any precautions, and that is repugnant. Everyone knows that having sex can lead to pregnancy -- to the creation of life. Why should a woman be permitted to take a life because she took a risk? And by the way, I am female and otherwise fall on the left end of the political spectrum. Show me a tree, I'll hug it; show me any animal and I'll fight to protect it. I support gay marriage and loathe guns. I'm somewhat religious, if such a state exists, but I'm Protestant and nowhere near being an evangelical. I simply feel that life is precious, that putting oneself in the position of becoming a parent is an act that should be treated with reverence, and that women in America have all the information and support they need to keep from becoming pregnant or, failing that, to accept their moral responsibility in creating life.
3
"...when else life can be deemed to begin if not at conception."
The fallacy of your argument is that there MUST BE a particular moment at which we can claim that a fetus becomes a person.
Yes, it would be convenient for us. But our desire to have such a clear-cut point doesn't mean that there is one.
The fallacy of your argument is that there MUST BE a particular moment at which we can claim that a fetus becomes a person.
Yes, it would be convenient for us. But our desire to have such a clear-cut point doesn't mean that there is one.
"But the vast majority of abortions are given to women whose birth control failed or who didn't bother to take any precautions, and that is repugnant."
How can the failure of birth control be repugnant? When men and women in good faith rely on various birth-control methods to avoid pregnancy, and those methods fail, where is the evil?
You might as well say that getting hit by a car careening around a corner at 45 mph and jumping a curb in a busy city is a stupid thing to do. Happens quite often here. Maybe not so much in Maine.
How can the failure of birth control be repugnant? When men and women in good faith rely on various birth-control methods to avoid pregnancy, and those methods fail, where is the evil?
You might as well say that getting hit by a car careening around a corner at 45 mph and jumping a curb in a busy city is a stupid thing to do. Happens quite often here. Maybe not so much in Maine.
I have to say your comment made me think and the result was that I don't believe that any denies that "life begins at conception," but, more to the point, when does "personhood" begin.
This article is attempting to make those of us who are pro-life feel guilty that we are against abortion, the taking of innocent human life. I do not feel guilty that I want to see that a baby in the mother's womb become fully developed after nine months. Childbirth is one of the most beautiful and joyful acts a woman will ever experience. How can anyone destroy their own flesh and blood? This is beyond comprehension to many of us.
I certainly do not think that a woman should be punished or imprisoned for having an abortion which is the most difficult decision any woman ever has to make. We cannot play God nor judge. They were probably alone and desperate and had no where to turn. We must show compassion and concern for these women who are hurting. We are there for them if they need a listening ear. I feel very sorry for those who have undergone an abortion as do others in the pro life movement. We are not judgmental but want to save lives.
There but for the grace of God go I. Let's give these women our support and love. They certainly do need it.
I certainly do not think that a woman should be punished or imprisoned for having an abortion which is the most difficult decision any woman ever has to make. We cannot play God nor judge. They were probably alone and desperate and had no where to turn. We must show compassion and concern for these women who are hurting. We are there for them if they need a listening ear. I feel very sorry for those who have undergone an abortion as do others in the pro life movement. We are not judgmental but want to save lives.
There but for the grace of God go I. Let's give these women our support and love. They certainly do need it.
2
"We cannot play God nor judge."
But that is exactly what you & the rest of the anti-choicers seek to do.
Is it not obvious to you that many people do not share your belief in a supreme being, or that if they do, do not buy the argument that a fetus is a person?
Why can you not respect that others' beliefs are just as valid as yours?
But that is exactly what you & the rest of the anti-choicers seek to do.
Is it not obvious to you that many people do not share your belief in a supreme being, or that if they do, do not buy the argument that a fetus is a person?
Why can you not respect that others' beliefs are just as valid as yours?
2
One more reason to despise Donald Trump: his 'put them in jail' comment seems to be the most feminist thing he has ever said. While all the other anti-choice activists infantilize women by pretending that they are the victims of evil practitioners, he at least seemed to admit that women are capable of making their own decisions and taking responsibility for their own actions. Of course, I believe the Cruzes and Kasiches and their ilk would love to put women in jail for having abortions, but they realize that position would expose them to everyone as the extremists they really are, so as long-standing stalwarts in the "pro-life" movement they know they need to pretend otherwise or risk losing their credibility with mainstream viewpoints. Luckily for them, they can do the next best thing - treat women like irrational, easily-manipulated children and talk about how much respect they have for their sacred role as mothers (while denying any of society's help and protection to their children once born).
9
"Perhaps Mr. Trump “misspoke,” as he described it, because he’s a relatively recent convert to the cause, unfamiliar with the doublespeak in which forcing women to give birth is a form of love, and punishment is the last thing on the anti-abortion movement’s mind. In his blundering way, he revealed the true logic of the case against legal abortion: If it’s murder, then murder has consequences. Too bad the moment of clarity couldn’t last."
I agree.
In his " blundering way" Trump -- not yet knowing the doublespeak of the GOP on abortion, basically said the emperor wears no clothes.
With his keen intuition, Trump came to the logical conclusion about calling abortion murder.
How about calling it " nobody's business, except the mother. ".
I think President Trump will get to that point rather quickly.
Probably even before the election, but after the nomination.
All kinds of incongruities are being brought to light with the intrepid insight of this fascinating candidate.
Everyone else is so entitled. Everyone else is business as usual.
Everyone else is milquetoast.
I agree.
In his " blundering way" Trump -- not yet knowing the doublespeak of the GOP on abortion, basically said the emperor wears no clothes.
With his keen intuition, Trump came to the logical conclusion about calling abortion murder.
How about calling it " nobody's business, except the mother. ".
I think President Trump will get to that point rather quickly.
Probably even before the election, but after the nomination.
All kinds of incongruities are being brought to light with the intrepid insight of this fascinating candidate.
Everyone else is so entitled. Everyone else is business as usual.
Everyone else is milquetoast.
6
There is another possibility. Abortion may well be 'murder' in the sense of intentional homicide -- the unjustified taking of an innocent life. But it also meaningfully differs from 'murder' in its sheer circumstances -- the victim is not an independent being walking the streets; its life, its very selfhood, is complexly blended with that of the putative assailant. What weight to give these differentiating factors is difficult to finally resolve, but these factors make a rote application of criminal law to the 'murder' of a fetus very difficult to justify on ethical grounds alone. It may well be the case that the coyness of anti-abortionists when the issue of the criminal culpability of the mother arises may be attributable to expediency. But this does not mean that a rigorous ethical analysis may lead to the same reluctance. Political sloganeering does not address the heart of the matter.
1
Maybe Mr. Trump has been doing us a huge favor this past few months.
He's ripped the bandaid of gentility from the Republican brand. He's exposed the voters the GOP has depended upon for power and relevance as all too prone to racism, bigotry and xenophobia, and easily stirred to the point of violence.
This is so embarrassing to the GOP elite they've begun writing about their base in terms they usually use for black people and Democrats - terribly insulting comments about their Failure To Take Personal Responsibility, not to mention mooching from the Federal cow, etc.
This is clearly a lot easier than taking stock of terrible GOP ideology which cuts taxes on the rich, empowers corporations to profit on the backs of the poor and endlessly sells the myth that drowning the government and enriching the rich will make everything better for the little guy.
It's a joke, a lousy, ugly, nasty joke and Trump has exposed it.
Now, he's laid bare their hostility to women. Yes they want to punish women. Merely the fact that they want to impose their religious ideology on all of us is an insult to the Constitution not to mention our own religions and personal values.
But what could be worse than forcing women and girls to give birth against our will?
That is outright slavery.
He's ripped the bandaid of gentility from the Republican brand. He's exposed the voters the GOP has depended upon for power and relevance as all too prone to racism, bigotry and xenophobia, and easily stirred to the point of violence.
This is so embarrassing to the GOP elite they've begun writing about their base in terms they usually use for black people and Democrats - terribly insulting comments about their Failure To Take Personal Responsibility, not to mention mooching from the Federal cow, etc.
This is clearly a lot easier than taking stock of terrible GOP ideology which cuts taxes on the rich, empowers corporations to profit on the backs of the poor and endlessly sells the myth that drowning the government and enriching the rich will make everything better for the little guy.
It's a joke, a lousy, ugly, nasty joke and Trump has exposed it.
Now, he's laid bare their hostility to women. Yes they want to punish women. Merely the fact that they want to impose their religious ideology on all of us is an insult to the Constitution not to mention our own religions and personal values.
But what could be worse than forcing women and girls to give birth against our will?
That is outright slavery.
32
We should all be grateful to Trump for exposing the logic behind the anti-abortion rhetoric. But he did not pursue it to its inevitable conclusion. If abortion is murder, so is contraception. Abortion prevents a potential life from coming into being. So does the pill, IUD, and any other means of preventing the conception when all the other conditions (viable ovum and sperm) are present. So what's the difference? None; and the religious attack on contraception, seen in the Little Sisters of the Poor lawsuit now at the Supreme Court, demonstrates. And I am not even talking about fertility treatments in which embryos are routinely created and discarded. If a fetus is a person, contraception, IVF and abortion are on the spectrum of atrocity which makes Auschwitz and the Gulag look like a child's play. At this point, I hope, any moral person will recoil from this outrageous comparison between murder of sentient human beings and regulation of reproduction, which is among the greatest achievements of civilization. But forced-birth proponents do not recoil; words like "murder" and "genocide" are the major part of their vocabulary. What does it tell you about the perversion of their moral sense? Instead of granting them the high moral ground they claim, we should all point out how profoundly unethical the anti-abortion position is.
13
Anti-abortion rhetoric is fraught with logical faults.
Some anti-abortion activists claim they would allow exceptions in cases of rape, incest or danger to the mother’s life. The first two exceptions, however, make no sense if the “pro-lifer” genuinely opposes abortion in the belief that it is the taking of a human life.
As ugly as the circumstances of rape or incest may be, they have no bearing on the humanity of the fetus: A fetus conceived in rape or incest is presumably every bit as human as any other unwanted fetus.
Yet so many anti-abortion activists cling to the exceptions for rape and incest in an unconvincing attempt to masquerade their position as “reasonable.” ("Yes, I’m reasonable. I’m willing to make some exceptions . . .")
Instead, however, what they are really saying is that they are willing to let women off the hook in cases when the woman had sex against her will but essentially force women to carry the fetus full-term when they participated voluntarily.
That, to me, sounds like anti-abortionists are animated not so much by a concern for the unborn fetus but by a desire to punish women for having sex.
Likewise, polls show that many “pro-lifers” are also “pro-death penalty,” which again indicates that it’s not the “sanctity of human life” that motivates their contradictory positions on abortion and the death penalty.
Some anti-abortion activists claim they would allow exceptions in cases of rape, incest or danger to the mother’s life. The first two exceptions, however, make no sense if the “pro-lifer” genuinely opposes abortion in the belief that it is the taking of a human life.
As ugly as the circumstances of rape or incest may be, they have no bearing on the humanity of the fetus: A fetus conceived in rape or incest is presumably every bit as human as any other unwanted fetus.
Yet so many anti-abortion activists cling to the exceptions for rape and incest in an unconvincing attempt to masquerade their position as “reasonable.” ("Yes, I’m reasonable. I’m willing to make some exceptions . . .")
Instead, however, what they are really saying is that they are willing to let women off the hook in cases when the woman had sex against her will but essentially force women to carry the fetus full-term when they participated voluntarily.
That, to me, sounds like anti-abortionists are animated not so much by a concern for the unborn fetus but by a desire to punish women for having sex.
Likewise, polls show that many “pro-lifers” are also “pro-death penalty,” which again indicates that it’s not the “sanctity of human life” that motivates their contradictory positions on abortion and the death penalty.
29
"As ugly as the circumstances of rape or incest may be, they have no bearing on the humanity of the fetus: A fetus conceived in rape or incest is presumably every bit as human as any other unwanted fetus. Yet so many anti-abortion activists cling to the exceptions"
True. The exceptions are political compromise, not an expression of the logic.
Therefore, we must expect that they'll be back again to get the rest. They won't stop until the exceptions are gone too.
True. The exceptions are political compromise, not an expression of the logic.
Therefore, we must expect that they'll be back again to get the rest. They won't stop until the exceptions are gone too.
2
abortion is murder, therefore there must be consequences for all people involved in it. If it can be shown that a woman was forced etc to do so, her consequence is less. However, jail is not the way to go, except maybe a small sentence for the doctor. All consequence for all crime must be aimed at prevention and rehabilitation. All people responsible must first be educated on the reality of what abortion is, so that they understand that it's murder. If the action was out of desperation, the woman should be given the proper help to avoid it whether economic or emotional not only after the fact, but before she even considers an abortion. The people involved would then be monitored if it is reasonably assumed they may commit the crime again and all attempts to prevent it have been taken.
to wipe your hands clean of giving consequences for a crime, for murder, is nothing less than devaluing the human life and is not pro life, however, to deal out an unconstructive punishment rather than a constructive, merciful, reasonable, effective consequence is not pro life because you have ended or damaged one and the crime will probably be recommited. All crimes should be approached through the latter method.
we must not seek partisanship or convenience, but truth which lacks on both the Right and Left
to wipe your hands clean of giving consequences for a crime, for murder, is nothing less than devaluing the human life and is not pro life, however, to deal out an unconstructive punishment rather than a constructive, merciful, reasonable, effective consequence is not pro life because you have ended or damaged one and the crime will probably be recommited. All crimes should be approached through the latter method.
we must not seek partisanship or convenience, but truth which lacks on both the Right and Left
why are the different positions taken by the many politicians on this issue so varied, changing and weird? it is all a money grab and/or a grab for votes. it is an attempt by many to force an action on women by the government, usually by politicians who claim they want less government. most claim it is murder, but do not want to punish the woman who controls whether to have sex, use protection and whether to try to end the pregnancy. if murder, why let the main person in all of this go without punishment for murder?
of course, all of this is just blow hard talk, because abortions are not illegal under current law. again, it is all a grab for money and votes. obviously, the conservatives want more government, more control by government, etc.
specifically, what is a conservative? please be specific and list the elements.
of course, all of this is just blow hard talk, because abortions are not illegal under current law. again, it is all a grab for money and votes. obviously, the conservatives want more government, more control by government, etc.
specifically, what is a conservative? please be specific and list the elements.
3
Having a child and raise him or her to b fine human being is great.But, doing so requires availability of resources, providing a nurturing family and "a village"(HRC) solid and strong enough that makes the child prepared enough to sift through the life's exposures and ignore the bad 1s while retaining the good.But when the woman realizes that the time is not ripe to go ahead and give birth + raise .Imposing a decision on her is an ultimate usurpation of her rights.No 1 is more suited or better positioned to decide which direction to take than her.Criminalizing the Woman 4 opting 4 an abortion goes hand in hand with draining resources 4 advising would be parents in poor places and countries on how many children their circumstance sustains raising them in a way that doesn't contribute to social and political problems.Too many unplanned parenthood is 1 contributing factor to massive youth unemployment.Unplanned birth is also a contributing factor to National Sec. danger : Few days ago there was a CNN reporting around this Belgian Moroccan immigrant family;The eldest son has sent a video which sows him in fatigue and scarf and that he is 1 of the beheader in chiefs of ISIS and doing actual beheading;With the parents they r a family of 13 and the siblings do not seem well adjusted, let alone exemplary citizens;What business such parents have breeding so many?.I am past 50,highly educated + good Educator but have put having a child on hold because felt Eco wise no yet ready.TMD.
7
People need to remember the Republcians war on women has been going on for decades now, and it was been placed on the fast track after the 2010 elections when they took over many of the statehouses. Republcians have been punishing women by closing off their ability to get access health care, even preventative care.
Governor Kasich just signed a bill to defund Planned Parenthood in his state. Ohio has the third highest infant mortality rate in the country, especially in minority population, and the most effective effort to combat high infant mortality rate was a program run by Planned Parenthood. These right wing religious zealots are the folks that claim to care about the 'unborn", but not about the high infant mortality rates. The states with the highest infant mortality rates are all red states in the south controlled by Republcians.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/john-kasich-black-infant-mortality_u...
Governor Kasich just signed a bill to defund Planned Parenthood in his state. Ohio has the third highest infant mortality rate in the country, especially in minority population, and the most effective effort to combat high infant mortality rate was a program run by Planned Parenthood. These right wing religious zealots are the folks that claim to care about the 'unborn", but not about the high infant mortality rates. The states with the highest infant mortality rates are all red states in the south controlled by Republcians.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/john-kasich-black-infant-mortality_u...
40
I'm pro abortion but object to the term pro choice. We actually don't have the right to do whatever we want with our bodies. We don't have the right to end our lives at our choice or mutilate ourselves. There is no inherent right to abortion - should we as a society recognize that abortion is a necessity, we should amend our laws to protect it - but not pretend it is something it isn't.
A major problem for defenders of abortion is this absurd mislabeling of the issue - this isn't about a woman's choice - it is about the best interests of the woman, her family, and society. By taking this foolish tact that this is women's rights issue, defenders of abortion have given the moral high ground to those who oppose it. Trump is right - it is termination of a human life. Rather than try to argue this point, acknowledge it - and have an honest conversation.
Society as a whole benefits from access to abortions. Women who aren't ready for children do a tremendous disservice to themselves and society when they have those children. We need access to abortions for this reason. There is no reasonable counter argument to this - unless society transforms in a way that it can help support any and all pregnancies and the children that follow.
A major problem for defenders of abortion is this absurd mislabeling of the issue - this isn't about a woman's choice - it is about the best interests of the woman, her family, and society. By taking this foolish tact that this is women's rights issue, defenders of abortion have given the moral high ground to those who oppose it. Trump is right - it is termination of a human life. Rather than try to argue this point, acknowledge it - and have an honest conversation.
Society as a whole benefits from access to abortions. Women who aren't ready for children do a tremendous disservice to themselves and society when they have those children. We need access to abortions for this reason. There is no reasonable counter argument to this - unless society transforms in a way that it can help support any and all pregnancies and the children that follow.
13
Planned Parenthood's slogan once was "Every child a wanted child." Now twisted into "Every abortion, a wanted woman." Felony murder. Replete with mug shots of female felons papering all available wall space at every post office.
The Catholic Church draws the line earlier by forbidding all birth control that actually works. With contraception forbidden, abortion criminalized, all that's left are cold showers, crossed legs and abstinence.
Bingo!
The Catholic Church doesn't want anyone having sex unless it's to add potential parishioners to their dwindling membership. No sex, no pregnancy, no abortion. Just say no!
Fundamentalist Christians interpret scripture literally, Clarence Darrow and his perambulating serpent notwithstanding. They believe women are subservient to men and have a single purpose beyond obedience to her husband, which is to bear and care for his children. Emphasis on HIS children. She's just a sperm incubator. A sex slave baby mama for the godly dad stud.
So this isn't about murder. It's about keeping women in their biblical place -- submissive, obedient, sperm receptacle, wet nurse, baby sitter, childcare provider, home-maker, housekeeper. Ever since the snake tricked Eve into violating the Garden ban against fruit consumption, and falling from a state of grace, Christians have had it in for Eve and all women, the sisterhood of original sinners. Punish them. Any and every reason. Always.
It's a small man, small hands world after all.
The Catholic Church draws the line earlier by forbidding all birth control that actually works. With contraception forbidden, abortion criminalized, all that's left are cold showers, crossed legs and abstinence.
Bingo!
The Catholic Church doesn't want anyone having sex unless it's to add potential parishioners to their dwindling membership. No sex, no pregnancy, no abortion. Just say no!
Fundamentalist Christians interpret scripture literally, Clarence Darrow and his perambulating serpent notwithstanding. They believe women are subservient to men and have a single purpose beyond obedience to her husband, which is to bear and care for his children. Emphasis on HIS children. She's just a sperm incubator. A sex slave baby mama for the godly dad stud.
So this isn't about murder. It's about keeping women in their biblical place -- submissive, obedient, sperm receptacle, wet nurse, baby sitter, childcare provider, home-maker, housekeeper. Ever since the snake tricked Eve into violating the Garden ban against fruit consumption, and falling from a state of grace, Christians have had it in for Eve and all women, the sisterhood of original sinners. Punish them. Any and every reason. Always.
It's a small man, small hands world after all.
99
Although I agree with your statement, I would change this one sentence, "The Catholic Church doesn't want anyone having sex unless it's to add potential parishioners to their dwindling membership." to The catholic Church doesn't want WOMEN having sex unless its to add potential parishioners....... They could care less about men have sex anytime with anyone, if they did why not the fervor over prostitution? Viagra? Vasectomy's? No, It is only the women the church is after to castigate for having sex unless it is to procreate. And frankly I am sick of it.
4
From the supporters we see, it is a lot more than the Catholic Church. Christian Sharia is more than just Catholics, and many of the others are the worst.
Quite apart from the issue of legal consistency, the decision to target the clinics and doctors providing abortions makes very good sense. In any conflict, good strategy requires the opposing side to strike at an adversary's most vulnerable point. The clinics and their doctors require licenses and they provide their services at fixed locations. Only a comparatively small number of clinics, moreover, perform abortions.
A state's threat to revoke a doctor's license puts her entire career at risk, with the additional consideration that defiance of the law could land the physician in prison. The fixed locations of the clinics, combined with their comparatively small numbers, make it fairly easy for the police to monitor their compliance with state regulations.
The fact that self-abortions and 'fly-by-night' clinics would replace the legal institutions would not affect the state's strategy. The number of abortions would certainly fall dramatically with the disappearance of the certified clinics, and the secret nature of the procedures that occurred would not weaken the public perception that the opponents of abortion had won the long struggle.
If the laws targeted the clients, on the other hand, the police would have to monitor the behavior of millions of women of child-bearing age. Not only would this approach arouse public sympathy for these individuals, it would also tax state resources to the limit. Much easier and cheaper to focus on the doctors and their clinics.
A state's threat to revoke a doctor's license puts her entire career at risk, with the additional consideration that defiance of the law could land the physician in prison. The fixed locations of the clinics, combined with their comparatively small numbers, make it fairly easy for the police to monitor their compliance with state regulations.
The fact that self-abortions and 'fly-by-night' clinics would replace the legal institutions would not affect the state's strategy. The number of abortions would certainly fall dramatically with the disappearance of the certified clinics, and the secret nature of the procedures that occurred would not weaken the public perception that the opponents of abortion had won the long struggle.
If the laws targeted the clients, on the other hand, the police would have to monitor the behavior of millions of women of child-bearing age. Not only would this approach arouse public sympathy for these individuals, it would also tax state resources to the limit. Much easier and cheaper to focus on the doctors and their clinics.
3
James,
You miss two things. First, the increase in the number of do-it-yourself or untrained friends and neighbors abortions will kill large numbers of the pregnant women involved. This lessens the expense to the taxpayer of carrying out lengthy trials and executions.
Second, why should you concentrate on the doctors alone? With increased automation there will be large numbers of uneducated men and women in need of work.. As the East German Communist regime showed, spying on neighbors can be an effective way of providing employment when the regular economy falls short.
-dlj.
1
In throwing out any pretense of legal consistency and approaching the topic purely from a pragmatic, strategic perspective, you present what is essentially a Machiavellian, ends-justifies-means argument, which, to me, lacks any ethical credibility whatsoever.
2
Two more comments: (1) I've never understood the three standard exceptions (pregnancies resulting from rape or incest or threatening the life of the woman). If every abortion is an act of murder, and the fertilized egg is an innocent "child", why not punish all involved in the "murder"? (And while we're at it, why not abolish the term "fetus"?) (2) In many conservative states, people who are found guilty of murder are executed. Why not execute a woman who deliberately solicits the "murder" of her "unborn child", even if the woman is a very young girl impregnated by a relative or neighbor?
While I do understand the need for political compromises in some legislation, I don't understand why most people opposed to abortion rights routinely favor the sacred three exceptions above. (Even Ted Cruz endorses one of them.)
While I do understand the need for political compromises in some legislation, I don't understand why most people opposed to abortion rights routinely favor the sacred three exceptions above. (Even Ted Cruz endorses one of them.)
20
Because hypocrisy is the cornerstone of many of republican polices. They know if they follow this real logic people will really pay attention and see the complete fallacy in their anti-abortion play and reject it. This is a major social wedge issue republicans are desperate not to lose.
8
Everything has consequences; however, because the human heart finds ways to ignore the human mind, those consequences are difficult to predict. If we look to our past we can see that maintaining or promoting any semblance of illegality or immorality around abortion harms society and the planet as a whole. Beyond the inescapable right of a person to have dominion over her body, there are the facts of what happens to women and their offspring when those offspring are not sincerely desired at that time, as well as the facts that our planet is severely overpopulated.
When religion is removed from the equation, the anti-choice, misogyny movement's argument crumbles.
When religion is removed from the equation, the anti-choice, misogyny movement's argument crumbles.
30
Are we supposed to believe that republicans really care about children whether they are born or not yet born?
There isn't shred of evidence that they care about children who are born. The weight of pregnancy falls fully on women. Men bear no consequences for sex or pregnancy. Yes some pay for child support, but the woman raises the child if the man is not present. She is blamed for the pregnancy.
Look at the birth control laws and difficulties they place on the woman. The cost of child care.
The invasion of the woman's body by the republicans is the same type of patrimony that muslims and jews exercise over their women. The women tempt the men into sex and rape.
Men can get viagra from their health care plans but can women get help with health care for their pregnancy and children? Nutrition, child care, education, college tuition and health care?
Let's cut through this nonsense about compassion and caring about the unborn children. The republicans don't care about children unless they are blond and blue eyed.
There isn't shred of evidence that they care about children who are born. The weight of pregnancy falls fully on women. Men bear no consequences for sex or pregnancy. Yes some pay for child support, but the woman raises the child if the man is not present. She is blamed for the pregnancy.
Look at the birth control laws and difficulties they place on the woman. The cost of child care.
The invasion of the woman's body by the republicans is the same type of patrimony that muslims and jews exercise over their women. The women tempt the men into sex and rape.
Men can get viagra from their health care plans but can women get help with health care for their pregnancy and children? Nutrition, child care, education, college tuition and health care?
Let's cut through this nonsense about compassion and caring about the unborn children. The republicans don't care about children unless they are blond and blue eyed.
71
Conservatives Do care about children...
They care tremendously about children before they are born...and then again after they reach military age.
It's that period between birth and school graduation that conservatives would really have the children out of sight, out of mind and, most especially, out of the budgets.
They care tremendously about children before they are born...and then again after they reach military age.
It's that period between birth and school graduation that conservatives would really have the children out of sight, out of mind and, most especially, out of the budgets.
1
Trump carried out the anti-abortion logic to its completion. The 2016 election is more than about the supreme court and economic inequality. It's about all types of inequality: racial, gender, and sexual orientation. We see the actions of Republican legislatures in southern states in gerrymandering districts and in limiting the right to vote of those who are different than the white middle-aged men who sit in those legislatures. And, of course, you can't ignore their voodoo economics of supply side, austerity, and tax cuts. We had four watershed presidential elections in American history: 1800, 1860, 1864 and 1932. I suspect 2016 is a fifth.
24
Jefferson, Lincoln, Lincoln, Roosevelt...Clinton.
A person could almost like Trump for that one moment of clarity. It is obvious even to his muddled mind that if abortion is illegal, then breaking the law has to be some kind of crime. What is the point otherwise? As policy it would be much simpler and cheaper to promote sex education and free access to birth control rather than set up a law enforcement system. Just as significant was Trump's response denying any culpability to men, for of course he believes that after impregnating the woman, a man should bear no responsibility for what happens next. Prohibiting abortion is fundamentally based on maintaining the traditional role of women as subservient to men. It is clear to anyone paying attention that anti-abortion politicians have little regard for the sanctity of life outside the womb and no sense of decency or respect toward the intimate details of women's lives. And certainly no idea of how difficult, expensive and all consuming motherhood is. Motherhood can be incredibly rewarding, but is horrifically frightening for someone who does not have the energy, desire, or means to take on the responsibility.
265
"Prohibiting abortion is fundamentally based on maintaining the traditional role of women as subservient to men." I agree with your entire comment, but in particular, the above quote. I believe the abortion "debate" is, for the most part, about controlling how or when a woman makes the decision to have an abortion. For some folks the idea that a woman is clearly making up her own mind based on what her current circumstances are or she just does not want to have a child at this time and has an abortion is abhorrent but if she has been raped or is a victim of incest or her life is in danger it is somehow "more OK" under these circumstances. It is an illogical argument. No religion or political movement have any right to "help" me make any of my medical decisions.
4
My pregnancy occurred almost four decades ago, while I was using a diaphragm and spermicide. I had been on the pill but in my youthful quest not to use any chemicals in my body that I didn't absolutely need, I decided to go a somewhat more natural route. I used the diaphragm faithfully and got pregnant anyway. I was just out of college, beginning a career, and hated and resented almost every minute of that pregnancy and subsequent upbringing of that child, to my eternal shame and regret. That pregnancy changed my life irrevocably for the worst.
Had abortion been a real option for me, I would have taken it, knowing what I know now - how my life turned out to be one disappointment after another, the disservice I did to my child, and the ultimate failure of my marriage. I was no more fit to be a mother than Donald Trump.
Had abortion been a real option for me, I would have taken it, knowing what I know now - how my life turned out to be one disappointment after another, the disservice I did to my child, and the ultimate failure of my marriage. I was no more fit to be a mother than Donald Trump.
1
birth control is available at the corner drug store
Beautifully said, Katha. I'd like to add one group to the list of those who should be prosecuted in case of an abortion: Those who deny proper sex education and contraceptives to young people, some of whom will unknowingly make babies, while others will make babies because they believe that taking a pill that prevents pregnancy perverts their deity's law.
Clearly, unintended consequences ensue when animals with brains pretend that they're angels with bodies. Those humans who currently walk the Earth do so because their ancestors had sex, and not all of those ancestors were married. To each other anyway. The drive to reproduce will produce offspring whether or not children are taught that they shouldn't even think about those things.
I do find the Republican Christian Family Values position repugnant, but we all participate in the fiction that sex is good in some circumstances and very, very evil in others. All of us who once were adolescents can remember the juxtaposition of the yearning with the preponderance of the surrounding blue noses who reminded us that sex was dirty and evil unless one exchanged vows in a church.
Finally, it's likely that part of this sanctimonious advocacy against the actual living in favor of zygotes is inspired by the kick one might get in imposing one's physical will on another. It is, by that definition, a nonsexual form of rape. One need only see the prurient glee in the eyes of those who shout, "Baby killer!" to understand the truth.
Clearly, unintended consequences ensue when animals with brains pretend that they're angels with bodies. Those humans who currently walk the Earth do so because their ancestors had sex, and not all of those ancestors were married. To each other anyway. The drive to reproduce will produce offspring whether or not children are taught that they shouldn't even think about those things.
I do find the Republican Christian Family Values position repugnant, but we all participate in the fiction that sex is good in some circumstances and very, very evil in others. All of us who once were adolescents can remember the juxtaposition of the yearning with the preponderance of the surrounding blue noses who reminded us that sex was dirty and evil unless one exchanged vows in a church.
Finally, it's likely that part of this sanctimonious advocacy against the actual living in favor of zygotes is inspired by the kick one might get in imposing one's physical will on another. It is, by that definition, a nonsexual form of rape. One need only see the prurient glee in the eyes of those who shout, "Baby killer!" to understand the truth.
291
This is so true--it's about power over another person, or in this case, gender. From an evolutionary standpoint one wonders how much of it has to do with the deep wish for males to be able to continue their DNA, no matter what the female wants.
2
Forgive me for being skeptical about when else life can be deemed to begin if not at conception. Conception is the sine qua non regarding life. How can one argue otherwise? Although a baby conceived through rape or incest is no less a precious life, I do understand that it would be cruel to insist that a woman continue with her pregnancy under those cicunstances. And I support abortion when a woman's life is at risk. But the vast majority of abortions are given to women whose birth control failed or who didn't bother to take any precautions, and that is repugnant. Everyone knows that having sex can lead to pregnancy -- to the creation of life. Why should a woman be permitted to take a life because she took a risk? And by the way, I am female and otherwise fall on the left end of the political spectrum. Show me a tree, I'll hug it; show me any animal and I'll fight to protect it. I support gay marriage and loathe guns. I'm somewhat religious, if such a state exists, but I'm Protestant and nowhere near being an evangelical. I simply feel that life is precious, that putting oneself in the position of becoming a parent is an act that should be treated with reverence, and that women in America have all the information and support they need to keep from becoming pregnant or, failing that, to accept their moral responsibility in creating life.
41
Requiring women to comply with religious beliefs is Shariah law, repulsive to Americans. Pronouncements about conception and personhood are welcomed among religious believers so long as they are not imposed on others. Some Americans may want women to wear abayas, hijab (headscarf) or niqab and make authoritative claims about why, but that would not be tolerated. Some Christians think that women should submit to their husband in everything, obey them, and refrain from speaking. That's fine for those women who agree but not for anyone who does not.
Close to 80% of all zygotes do not make it to birth. Do we need to issue death certificates? Must we change inheritance law to address all of these Americans who have been forgotten?
Should we follow the First Amendment and leave religions to the religious but prevent the religious from imposing their beliefs upon us all?
Close to 80% of all zygotes do not make it to birth. Do we need to issue death certificates? Must we change inheritance law to address all of these Americans who have been forgotten?
Should we follow the First Amendment and leave religions to the religious but prevent the religious from imposing their beliefs upon us all?
38
Just because you are a woman and someone who is supposedly on the left doesn't mean that you are without mysoginy and impulses to judge and control other women. The second that you start deciding that a fertilized egg is more important than a woman, you've lost all credibility and should stop using the phrase "all life is precious."
36
"But the vast majority of abortions are given to women whose birth control failed or who didn't bother to take any precautions, and that is repugnant."
How can the failure of birth control be repugnant? When men and women in good faith rely on various birth-control methods to avoid pregnancy, and those methods fail, where is the evil?
You might as well say that getting hit by a car careening around a corner at 45 mph and jumping a curb in a busy city is a stupid thing to do. Happens quite often here. Maybe not so much in Maine.
[Since your comment has been repeated a few times, allow me to repeat my response also to this version, a NYT Picks.]
How can the failure of birth control be repugnant? When men and women in good faith rely on various birth-control methods to avoid pregnancy, and those methods fail, where is the evil?
You might as well say that getting hit by a car careening around a corner at 45 mph and jumping a curb in a busy city is a stupid thing to do. Happens quite often here. Maybe not so much in Maine.
[Since your comment has been repeated a few times, allow me to repeat my response also to this version, a NYT Picks.]
19
Very well put. I was actually thinking along the same lines earlier. State laws that are specifically against abortions are not always specifically against abortion providers only. And even if they were, if there ever comes a day when a woman can safely terminate an unwanted pregnancy on her own, do people really think no US state would go after her as the *provider* of her own abortion or that of a daughter?
8
Once again, Trump offended his fellow Republicans by speaking out loud what they secretly believe. It should be obvious that the people working hard to eliminate abortion services don't "love them both." Frank Luntz, the right wing messaging expert, no doubt has warned the so-called "pro-lifers" that "compassion" must be the spin they put out (for the public) on the mother, until such time as they can eradicate legal abortion for good. If they tell their real viewpoint, public opinion would crush them. Frank Luntz is the one who advises the Republicans that turning Social Security into a voucher system should be called "personalizing" Social Security.
I have escorted women into a Planned Parenthood clinic. I can assure you that love is not the feeling that is being communicated to the women as they try to rush past the screaming and catcalls of "Murderer!" Love is also not the feeling when the "pro-life" fringe foot-soldiers bring guns to clinics and mow down everyone they see.
Of course, punishment for women is the true theme of everything about the anti-abortion movement. And if love for real babies were the motivation, they wouldn't be so strangely insensitive to the lives of real mothers and children.
I have escorted women into a Planned Parenthood clinic. I can assure you that love is not the feeling that is being communicated to the women as they try to rush past the screaming and catcalls of "Murderer!" Love is also not the feeling when the "pro-life" fringe foot-soldiers bring guns to clinics and mow down everyone they see.
Of course, punishment for women is the true theme of everything about the anti-abortion movement. And if love for real babies were the motivation, they wouldn't be so strangely insensitive to the lives of real mothers and children.
228
Frank Luntz is a 2-bit pr flak and advertising pimp who would be more at home writing geico insurance adverts
come to think of it, politics isnt that far off
come to think of it, politics isnt that far off
1
Why this shock? Donald J. Trump merely stated in words what the GOP has been actually seeking; to make abortion a crime.
116
Is it less of a crime to make a woman bear a child if the birth endangers her life? Or what if she harms the child she conceived in incest or in rape? Or what about a case in which the mother is forced to bear a child with severest handicaps? I can't see any of the G.O.P. establishment offering to open their hearts and homes to such children by adopting them, accepting the responsibility for their well-being.
For me life begins when a child is capable of living unassisted outside its mother's womb. Perhaps my view is not in agreement with that of the so-called moral majority, but if I wanted to work against abortion, my fellow pro-lifers and I had better be ready to adopt the children we wanted to save. That would be a sign of true Christian values, unlike terrorizing women who have arrived at an impasse in their lives, or even running amok in a Centre aiming for both women and doctors.
As for punishing women who want to have abortions or who have them - they are suffering enough already because of the fanatics who want to tell them how to live their lives, and who can yell and holler insults, but not offer any kind of help.
For me life begins when a child is capable of living unassisted outside its mother's womb. Perhaps my view is not in agreement with that of the so-called moral majority, but if I wanted to work against abortion, my fellow pro-lifers and I had better be ready to adopt the children we wanted to save. That would be a sign of true Christian values, unlike terrorizing women who have arrived at an impasse in their lives, or even running amok in a Centre aiming for both women and doctors.
As for punishing women who want to have abortions or who have them - they are suffering enough already because of the fanatics who want to tell them how to live their lives, and who can yell and holler insults, but not offer any kind of help.
6
The motto of the Republican Party should be "Do as we say, not what we do." How many times will we continue to read and hear about a Republican Conservative individual with the public's ear who preaches, at the top of his/her voice, the sins of normal behavior (mostly having to do with sex), then, unsurprisingly, find them at the top of the news in a sex scandal, always having been caught doing the very things they preached against, and always at the top of their voices and the Old Testament in their hands? What hypocrites! Their apologies are empty. When they are caught, they want mercy, not justice.
41
The fundamental principle at the foundation of all anti-choice sentiment is that women's lives do not matter. We are not entitled to relationships, careers, or families on our own terms; we are not entitled to basic autonomy of our bodies; we exist only to reproduce. Abortion is not acceptable because allowing it acknowledges that women matter.
What other explanation is there for forced birth? For the unknowable anguish of being forced to grow a rapist's baby inside you? For criminalizing the absence of interest or ability for parenthood? For enacting laws that run counter to the positions of medical professionals? For forcing women to undergo unnecessary anesthesia, increasing risk to their health? For forcing women to travel hundreds of miles, go to repeat visits, undergo medically unnecessary procedures, and incur significant expense for a routine medical procedure? The woman's life, pain, needs don't matter.
All the anti-choice PR about loving women and protecting babies is a well rehearsed show; behind it the only thing they actually value is controlling other people. If you truly love a woman you respect her choices and support them, because you recognize she knows what is best for herself. If you truly love babies, you enact robust social and education programs that ensure they all grow up well fed, educated, and cared for. Since anti-choicers do the opposites, their true motivations are clear.
What other explanation is there for forced birth? For the unknowable anguish of being forced to grow a rapist's baby inside you? For criminalizing the absence of interest or ability for parenthood? For enacting laws that run counter to the positions of medical professionals? For forcing women to undergo unnecessary anesthesia, increasing risk to their health? For forcing women to travel hundreds of miles, go to repeat visits, undergo medically unnecessary procedures, and incur significant expense for a routine medical procedure? The woman's life, pain, needs don't matter.
All the anti-choice PR about loving women and protecting babies is a well rehearsed show; behind it the only thing they actually value is controlling other people. If you truly love a woman you respect her choices and support them, because you recognize she knows what is best for herself. If you truly love babies, you enact robust social and education programs that ensure they all grow up well fed, educated, and cared for. Since anti-choicers do the opposites, their true motivations are clear.
880
QOTM – mostly right, but really the only thing the anti-choice candidates care about controlling is votes. The abortion issue is aimed squarely at right-wing one-issue voters who do not pay enough attention to the rest of the platform. The issue is used to make sure folks vote with their emotions rather than their brains.
3
Never thought I would find myself defending Trump, but he is simply correct. Crime, detection, and punishment are an inseparable trio. IF an abortion is a crime, then the criminals must be brought to trial and, if found guilty, must be punished. If abortion is a "sin" then that is the business of God. Whether it is the church, synagogue, mosque, or state, clasping their collective hands in pretend horror, it is ALL about control. They each want to increase their population in order to get more power. And that, my friend, is a why we have over population, war, resource poverty, and global destruction!
3
The fundamental position of the murder on demand crowd is that the rights of the fetus as a human being don't matter.
Your lies not withstanding those are the facts.
Your lies not withstanding those are the facts.
1
Thank you, Donald Trump, Katha Pollitt and the New York Times. You have finally, after all these years, exposed the truth that the "pro-life" movement and the Republicans who do its bidding have been so careful to hide. And thanks to Chris Matthews of MSNBC for asking the question and pressing Mr. Trump to blurt out the first thing that came to his mind, which, in this case, was logical and factual. If abortion is murder, the woman who paid someone to "murder" her "unborn child," or did it herself, cannot go unpunished! Now, every other anti-abortion candidate for public office, national, state or local, must be made to answer the same question Trump did and not be allowed, as Kasich was, to claim that only abortion doctors or back-alley butchers would go to jail. Our criminal justice doesn't work that way. All parties to a crime are prosecuted and punished. And why are we so late in considering the logical, legal consequences for women if Republican lawmakers and anti-abortion advocates get their way? For one thing, because Republican candidates have won a lot of votes by pledging to "save innocent, defenseless babies", do the will of God, protect "family values" and "the sanctity of life," and all the rest. Votes they wouldn't have gotten if they had also promised to put all those girlfriends, wives, daughters, granddaughters and sisters in prison and ruin their whole lives.
133
The same desperation that a female has when she seeks out an abortion for any number of reasons, as many as there are individuals, is the same desperation she had when she jumped into bed without adequate protection in the throes of sexual desire. Being born human, not by choice, is punishment enough for most of us. If you are lucky enough to go through a very idyllic childhood and life, I am happy for you. Most, including myself, were not that fortunate. I think there is the myth out there that humans are capable of being taught how to prevent pregnancy, obesity, drug addiction, etc. But the longer I live, the less I believe that is the case. That is why we have abortion for females, drugs for diabetes, and sports for men to ease their testosterone.
14
Your image of a heedless, impulsive woman "jumping into bed without adequate protection" is exactly the false image the article complains about. By conjuring up such an image, you turn women into cartoons and completely disregard the many other serious reasons a woman would choose to end a pregnancy. And, of course, you get to feel superior because, in your imagination, only irresponsible, childlike women ever need abortions.
8
Mary Kay Klassen -- "when she jumped into bed without adequate protection in the throes of sexual desire"
Condoms fail. Birth control pills fail. The percentages are available on the internet, and they are significant.
Rape happens. Incest happens. Medical emergencies happen. Birth defects happen. Divorce happens to half of us, sometimes sparked into life by the stress of "we are having a baby."
There are a vast number of things that happen in addition to lust driven unprotected sex. Abortion is about all of that, and a woman's right to decide in her specific life circumstances.
Condoms fail. Birth control pills fail. The percentages are available on the internet, and they are significant.
Rape happens. Incest happens. Medical emergencies happen. Birth defects happen. Divorce happens to half of us, sometimes sparked into life by the stress of "we are having a baby."
There are a vast number of things that happen in addition to lust driven unprotected sex. Abortion is about all of that, and a woman's right to decide in her specific life circumstances.
2
This echoed my thoughts exactly - people want to make abortion criminal but not punish people who attempt to get one? Makes no sense. In this case the problem's not Trump but the total lack of logic in the pro life movement. It's much more palatable to say you're putting rogue doctors in jail than women.
Say this actually becomes the law of the land. Does that mean that a do it yourself abortion is not punishable, but going to a doctor is? How truly perverted is that?
Say this actually becomes the law of the land. Does that mean that a do it yourself abortion is not punishable, but going to a doctor is? How truly perverted is that?
56
Right on target. The most lucid post-Trumpian analysis I've yet read.
11
"We take murder pretty seriously in this country, especially the murder of children, . . . "
Unless the children are murdered en masse at their elementary school by someone with an assault rifle.
Unless the children are murdered en masse at their elementary school by someone with an assault rifle.
690
Re Robert Eller
'"We take murder pretty seriously in this country, especially the murder of children, . . . "
Unless the children are murdered en masse at their elementary school by someone with an assault rifle.'
Or happen to be in a far away nation with oil
'"We take murder pretty seriously in this country, especially the murder of children, . . . "
Unless the children are murdered en masse at their elementary school by someone with an assault rifle.'
Or happen to be in a far away nation with oil
7
You are right, we clearly don't take mental illness seriously enough in this country.
1
If an abortion is murder, then it follows that a miscarriage should be Involuntary manslaughter. Should we ail all women who have a miscarriage?
24
Trump is actually preferable in abortion. The revolting treatment Cruz and Kasich condone is abysmal. Forcing women to bear children is barbaric enslavement, and how they construe that as somehow protecting us seems beyond pretext. I can't say which Republican candidate is the worst, but not a single one of them seems to be a moral or compassionate human.
92
Very true and logical. And yet somehow Trump is considered the crazy one in the GOP.
18
Thank you, Donald, for inadvertently exposing the hypocrisy of the 'pro-life' movement. Abortion is considered as murder by many, but when asked if a woman who has one should go to jail the answer is either 'I never considered that' or a shocked 'No!' Why is that? If having an abortion were truly the moral equivalent of infanticide why aren't they suggesting lengthy prison sentences? I wonder.
509
I don't wonder. Their fundamental argument is illogical, but they trot it out anyway for the same reason most racists are too ashamed to flat-out state that they think white people are superior. Anti-choicers are afraid to tell the truth -- that they think women are first sex objects and breeders, and only secondarily autonomous human beings.
4
Amy Herrmann St. Louis, MO: because fertilized eggs, embryos and fetuses are not children despite the passion of the "many" you quote, to imagine that they are.
We don't suggest lengthy prison sentences because folks are a bit more enlightened than your imagined "many" and we don't want to return to a theological nightmare that punishes women for the collusion of men.
We don't suggest lengthy prison sentences because folks are a bit more enlightened than your imagined "many" and we don't want to return to a theological nightmare that punishes women for the collusion of men.
The fact is, the anti choice crowd wants their despised government to force women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term. They want the police state readily available to surveil pregnant women. They want American women to live in a biological prison, flitting around the kitchen with Father always knowing best.
We've been electing the fringe of our society for a number of years now, and it's time to put them out of the seats of power. Their disregard for women and children is stunning -- and dangerous.
We've been electing the fringe of our society for a number of years now, and it's time to put them out of the seats of power. Their disregard for women and children is stunning -- and dangerous.
720
The pathetic dishonesty that animates most men who are against abortion -- more accurately, against women who have abortions -- is reflected in research that correlates male hostility towards women who have abortions with men who have had negative experiences with woman characterized as "betrayal, cheating, 'left me for another guy,' flirting, easy, heart-breaker," all indicative of male retribution generalized against all women for previous personal failed relationships. It is misogyny that stems from men who failed with women and now see abortion as evidence of women's nature to betray deserving men for undeserving lovers. Remedy may be raising the voting age for men to 65, when erectile dysfunction is rampant and women and sheep are safe.
16
Laureen, the world has already seen such a state as you describe in your first paragraph, Ceauceascu's Romania. Pregnant women were observed, and taken in for questioning if they did not have a child after all. What was the outcome of forced births? Houses full of unwanted children, normal and handicapped, all of them neglected. Footage of the conditions in those orphanages were dreadful!
Don't tell me that the Pro-Lifers would see to it that unwanted children would be treated any better in the U.S.A. Hey, that would mean spending big money to support those children they forced into the world. They would perhaps want to establish a Big Brother society, seeing to it that trumped-up charges could be brought against any woman who did not bring their children to predetermined exams, or whose children did not thrive. ....
Don't tell me that the Pro-Lifers would see to it that unwanted children would be treated any better in the U.S.A. Hey, that would mean spending big money to support those children they forced into the world. They would perhaps want to establish a Big Brother society, seeing to it that trumped-up charges could be brought against any woman who did not bring their children to predetermined exams, or whose children did not thrive. ....
13
I don't think I understand your comment. On the one hand you say that the "anti-choice" crowd---do you mean pro-lifers?--- are the "police state" and are forcing you to carry your child. On the other hand you say the "disregard for women and children" is dangerous. For sure, abortion is dangerous to children, those yet unborn.
Imagine that under a President Cruz, all females, from the moment they are able to conceive, would be forced to carry to full term pregnancies violently forced upon them by strangers, and, further, in the case of menstruating little girls, those violently forced upon them by their fathers, brothers, grandfathers, and uncles.
A woman with a broken arm, a black eye, and a stab wound would be told indifferently, "Stop crying, and go read about prenatal care."
A stunned and frightened twelve-year-old would be told, "Put down that game and go pick out a name already."
That's what we're telling them: that they ultimately are mere birthing vessels.
What's truly unfathomable is that those who clamor for such a law are committing the girls and women in their own lives to those very standards.
It's sociopathic.
Period.
A woman with a broken arm, a black eye, and a stab wound would be told indifferently, "Stop crying, and go read about prenatal care."
A stunned and frightened twelve-year-old would be told, "Put down that game and go pick out a name already."
That's what we're telling them: that they ultimately are mere birthing vessels.
What's truly unfathomable is that those who clamor for such a law are committing the girls and women in their own lives to those very standards.
It's sociopathic.
Period.
151
Well, they aren't really committing their women to those standards. Their wives and daughters just have problems that can only be diagnosed by an exploratory D&C.
5
Good column. I wish Ms. Pollitt had included a comment about how Trump also said that the men whose sperm caused the pregnancy should not be punished. Misogyny, control, double standards...
24
How can you argue that 11 million people should be forcibly expatriated because they illegally entered the country but maintain that there should be no consequences for illegally "murdering" your unborn? As the right loves to argue when immigration is the issue "either we are a nation of laws or we aren't".
13
If any of the current Republican candidates is elected in November, the drumbeat to ban abortion will get very loud after 1/20/2017. As Ms. Pollitt writes, if abortion is considered to be murder, then women will be prosecuted. The logic is quite simple. Women considering whether to vote for Trump or Cruz or Kasich need to understand this and think very carefully before deciding how they will vote come November.
71
Imagine if Trump had to face a group of women who have had abortions and explain that they deserved "punishment." He would see our friends, neighbors, coworkers, relations - probably some of his own, too. They are not villainous nor wayward. Women have abortions after weighing options for a problematic pregnancy, which is a right, a reasoned decision, and should remain safe, legal and dignified.
414
The question for him on those who do not get an abortion; Would he continue to give finanical aid to those having multiple illegimate children?
I don't think Trump realizes that the issues comming before him as president requires more than knowing how to negotiate an agreement.
I don't think Trump realizes that the issues comming before him as president requires more than knowing how to negotiate an agreement.
2
Yes, NM: A perfect example of the appeal to so many politicians and their followers of the coercive power of irrational thought -- whether religious or secular. So many Americans show that they want the world, including women's uteruses, to shape up according to THEIR satisfaction. One would think they would prefer to mind their own business, which might reveal a flaw or two they would not want to become the basis of political scrutiny.
2
The unwanted or unaffordable child is the punishment for having sex. We can pretend to have sympathy for the pregnant victim, but the difficulties of raising a child or an additional one are the victim's problem. To the extent that she did not want this child, forcing her to bear it is a giant denial of freedom and autonomy, and such denial is a form that many punishments take.
137
Yes, but in republican world it is only the female who deserves punishment. In republican world the male is free to have sex and walk away from all responsibility, they are free to have sex with others when they are married, they are free to hire prostitutes, get ED drugs to assist and have it paid for. In republican world women are creatures (not equals) to be used as their masters wish and locked back up when they are done with them. Very very disconcerting attitude.
7
Thank you for this comment.
It clarifies what we are up against.
It clarifies what we are up against.
2
terri -- "In republican world the male is free to have sex and walk away from all responsibility"
No, in their Land of Personal Responsibility the sperm donor has the welfare office chasing after him for life for reimbursement of any and all benefits given to the mother. Also there are prior-withholding child support orders that last 23 years, even if he did not know she was pregnant and never even sees the child, even if she does not want him involved. They are financially tied for life, no matter what they want, either or both of them.
It is not a free pass. Of course the woman suffers more impact on her life, I'm not saying it is equal. But these guys hate the unwed fathers as much as the unwed mothers, and in their racist minds they are all black and the non-paying fathers are in jail piling up child support debt for when they get out.
That is the nasty thinking we face. It isn't just against women, it is against a life style of not being married with 2.5 children in their fantasy of 1950's Middle America.
No, in their Land of Personal Responsibility the sperm donor has the welfare office chasing after him for life for reimbursement of any and all benefits given to the mother. Also there are prior-withholding child support orders that last 23 years, even if he did not know she was pregnant and never even sees the child, even if she does not want him involved. They are financially tied for life, no matter what they want, either or both of them.
It is not a free pass. Of course the woman suffers more impact on her life, I'm not saying it is equal. But these guys hate the unwed fathers as much as the unwed mothers, and in their racist minds they are all black and the non-paying fathers are in jail piling up child support debt for when they get out.
That is the nasty thinking we face. It isn't just against women, it is against a life style of not being married with 2.5 children in their fantasy of 1950's Middle America.
1
Should men be punished too? Let's examine the legal logic of the Right to Lifers.
If a man pays for a murder, then of course he should be punished for it. Those who hire the murderer in a murder for hire go down hard.
If a man accompanies a woman to the clinic, and holds her hand, and provides moral support, then of course he should be punished for it. It is the same as when someone is killed in a bank robbery, and all the robbers are guilty of the murder, and their getaway driver too. It is called "felony murder."
If the woman's mother or father or brother or friend goes with her, they should be punished too. Felony murder.
If the man knows nothing about her decision to terminate, and she goes without him, then no he ought not to be punished. He is not a conspirator. The same is true if he simply abandons her -- he isn't part of the crime.
The Right to Life theory requires all of this, not just punishment of the woman. And her doctor, the nurses, and the clinic staff too.
When you see what it requires, absolutely in logic requires, then you see it must be wrong.
But a man is not guilty of the abortion if he was just the sperm donor. That may be part of the chain of events, but it is not part of the "murder."
If a man pays for a murder, then of course he should be punished for it. Those who hire the murderer in a murder for hire go down hard.
If a man accompanies a woman to the clinic, and holds her hand, and provides moral support, then of course he should be punished for it. It is the same as when someone is killed in a bank robbery, and all the robbers are guilty of the murder, and their getaway driver too. It is called "felony murder."
If the woman's mother or father or brother or friend goes with her, they should be punished too. Felony murder.
If the man knows nothing about her decision to terminate, and she goes without him, then no he ought not to be punished. He is not a conspirator. The same is true if he simply abandons her -- he isn't part of the crime.
The Right to Life theory requires all of this, not just punishment of the woman. And her doctor, the nurses, and the clinic staff too.
When you see what it requires, absolutely in logic requires, then you see it must be wrong.
But a man is not guilty of the abortion if he was just the sperm donor. That may be part of the chain of events, but it is not part of the "murder."
81
That may be part of the chain of events, but it is not part of the "murder."
I'm referring here to the legal doctrine of efficient or sufficient intervening act, creating an independent sufficient superseding cause.
Again, I'm trying to apply standard legal theory to show how this thinking must work.
So, Trump was right, the man is not to blame, unless he does more, participates in the subsequent superseding cause of decision and action to terminate the pregnancy. That was not in the hypothetical given to Trump.
This is where the Right to Life thinking goes. All the way.
I'm referring here to the legal doctrine of efficient or sufficient intervening act, creating an independent sufficient superseding cause.
Again, I'm trying to apply standard legal theory to show how this thinking must work.
So, Trump was right, the man is not to blame, unless he does more, participates in the subsequent superseding cause of decision and action to terminate the pregnancy. That was not in the hypothetical given to Trump.
This is where the Right to Life thinking goes. All the way.
10
The worst part of what you wrote is here:
"If the man knows nothing about her decision to terminate, and she goes without him, then no he ought not to be punished. He is not a conspirator. The same is true if he simply abandons her -- he isn't part of the crime."
Are you for real? Honestly, Mark. Imagine the state of a newly pregnant girl or woman abandoned by her boy or man. She did not go to a fertility clinic to obtain sperm; he is not a sperm donor. He is a man who had sex with a girl or woman, dropped his sperm and walked away with no consequences for him, leaving her in a world of trouble.
In my world that man is not with out blame - he is exercising his privilege (sowing his oats, ha ha ) and is showing an contemptible level of irresponsibility to the person he had sex with because she didn't get pregnant alone. He is a large part of a bigger ethical crime when he abandons her. Because he has had sex with another and treated that person in a way that clarifies her insignificance. To him, and to the anti-choice bullies who are limiting the lives of females and who our young women can be, by taking away their rights to make decisions about their own lives.
Not all men abandon, and some love their women, but let's face it - enough of them do not and that is the source of all this anguish.
"If the man knows nothing about her decision to terminate, and she goes without him, then no he ought not to be punished. He is not a conspirator. The same is true if he simply abandons her -- he isn't part of the crime."
Are you for real? Honestly, Mark. Imagine the state of a newly pregnant girl or woman abandoned by her boy or man. She did not go to a fertility clinic to obtain sperm; he is not a sperm donor. He is a man who had sex with a girl or woman, dropped his sperm and walked away with no consequences for him, leaving her in a world of trouble.
In my world that man is not with out blame - he is exercising his privilege (sowing his oats, ha ha ) and is showing an contemptible level of irresponsibility to the person he had sex with because she didn't get pregnant alone. He is a large part of a bigger ethical crime when he abandons her. Because he has had sex with another and treated that person in a way that clarifies her insignificance. To him, and to the anti-choice bullies who are limiting the lives of females and who our young women can be, by taking away their rights to make decisions about their own lives.
Not all men abandon, and some love their women, but let's face it - enough of them do not and that is the source of all this anguish.
31
Mark was just showing the logical absurdity of this sort of "pro-life" (what an idiotic term!) thinking, Ellen.
26
I would follow this logic one step further: if a woman is culpable of murder by procuring an abortion, so is the father. I was appalled when Chris Matthews, finally held Donald Trump's feet to the fire in that amazing interview, asked the final question: shouldn't the man also be punished?
Of course Trump who never thinks through anything until asked blurted out that no, the man would not be responsible. Well the last time I studied Biology, it takes two to make a baby. So if terminating a pregnancy is to be punished, the punishment should be equally administered. And no, the abortion provider is generally not the same as the father.
The illogic, inconsistency, and hypocrisy of Sharia Christianity is astounding. Only the woman is targeted when it comes to matters of the most intimate parts of her body. Trump spoke the truth for many within the antiabortion movement:The desire to control a woman's most private decisions is one sided and misogynistic. I
Just think: it only took a good interviewer and a candidate so recently converted to the pro-life movement that he still does not understand its nuances and politics to expose the ugly truth about what the GOP is trying to accomplish in the never ending abortion debate.
Of course Trump who never thinks through anything until asked blurted out that no, the man would not be responsible. Well the last time I studied Biology, it takes two to make a baby. So if terminating a pregnancy is to be punished, the punishment should be equally administered. And no, the abortion provider is generally not the same as the father.
The illogic, inconsistency, and hypocrisy of Sharia Christianity is astounding. Only the woman is targeted when it comes to matters of the most intimate parts of her body. Trump spoke the truth for many within the antiabortion movement:The desire to control a woman's most private decisions is one sided and misogynistic. I
Just think: it only took a good interviewer and a candidate so recently converted to the pro-life movement that he still does not understand its nuances and politics to expose the ugly truth about what the GOP is trying to accomplish in the never ending abortion debate.
481
The problem with holding the impregnating male equally responsible for the "crime" is that it also gives him equal right to decide to abort or not to abort. And when there are only two "votes" and they disagree, who breaks the tie? Better to leave the decision and the responsibility in the woman's hands.
3
Christine: And if the man wants the woman to have a baby?
2
Was the question on a fathers culpability framed such that the father was complicit in the abortion? It was not. In any case, if abortion law framed that a particular abortion violated the law, then all involved should be treated under the law.
Understanding the nuance requires discussion, not trap questions intended to produce an "opinion"
Until we can have sincere discussion on topics such as abortion and gun control we will never reach compromise. Extremists continue to dominate the discourse.
Understanding the nuance requires discussion, not trap questions intended to produce an "opinion"
Until we can have sincere discussion on topics such as abortion and gun control we will never reach compromise. Extremists continue to dominate the discourse.
The abortion rights arguments and Christian Shariah Law counter-arguments have grown too complicated.
We need to simplify the debate.
We can agree to heavily regulate uteruses as long as we can agree to heavily regulate the root of these pregnancies....testicles and their renegade sperm.
Equal protection under the law is the most basic Constitutional principle.
Problem solved.
The abortion argument just evaporated into thin misogynistic air.
We need to simplify the debate.
We can agree to heavily regulate uteruses as long as we can agree to heavily regulate the root of these pregnancies....testicles and their renegade sperm.
Equal protection under the law is the most basic Constitutional principle.
Problem solved.
The abortion argument just evaporated into thin misogynistic air.
314
No, it really did.
You fuel the anti-abortionist cause when you insult them and call them misogynistic.
And as men have no rights in regards to abortion - your point about equality necessitating punishing them - is ridiculous.
You fuel the anti-abortionist cause when you insult them and call them misogynistic.
And as men have no rights in regards to abortion - your point about equality necessitating punishing them - is ridiculous.
I know you are being silly as to make a point, but I don't think anyone is legally arguing that sperm and eggs (which carry the potential for new life) are guaranteed the same Constitutional protections as a newly formed zygote.
It's simpler to carry the "murder" argument to its logical, horrific conclusion: If the zygote is a Constitutionally protected human being, then any action of the mother is subject to legal scrutiny and control.
"Miss Jones, the court finds you guilty of murder by miscarriage. You were well aware of the possibility that you might accidentally trip while walking, yet you continued to show wanton disregard for the child. US Code 356 3(c)(a) requires all pregnant woman to be in bed at all times, and eat only the US Government approved foods and supplements."
It's simpler to carry the "murder" argument to its logical, horrific conclusion: If the zygote is a Constitutionally protected human being, then any action of the mother is subject to legal scrutiny and control.
"Miss Jones, the court finds you guilty of murder by miscarriage. You were well aware of the possibility that you might accidentally trip while walking, yet you continued to show wanton disregard for the child. US Code 356 3(c)(a) requires all pregnant woman to be in bed at all times, and eat only the US Government approved foods and supplements."
3
This is the THIRD piece in Opinion today that gives Trump free real estate and ink (Gail and the editorial, as well). And that doesn’t include news stories. Is anyone keeping track of the jillions Trump saves in self-promotion by simply saying something outrageous?
The snark in this piece won’t get us closer to an effective defense of Roe v. Wade. It offends Americans who are deeply opposed to abortion on religious grounds, and, given the vast numbers of our fellow Americans who fit that description, ticking them off uselessly isn’t the best approach. We need more Opinion pieces that make it clear that we’re headed closer to a religious war on our own soil over abortion, and that this deadlock is making the definition of “American” quite different from state to state. Most Americans, religious or otherwise, would be concerned about that.
We had a brilliant compromise imposed by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1973 that sought to make the definition of “American” the same in all our states, at least on the subject of abortion. It respected the rights of a woman to control her reproductive destiny while also respecting the authority of states to regulate the modalities of death. It was the best that we’re ever going to achieve in a highly pluralistic society, and we all should defend it as the type of compromise that is essential to governance of such a diverse people.
Now, shorn of snark about the proper consequences of “murder”, THAT’S the message we should be evangelizing.
The snark in this piece won’t get us closer to an effective defense of Roe v. Wade. It offends Americans who are deeply opposed to abortion on religious grounds, and, given the vast numbers of our fellow Americans who fit that description, ticking them off uselessly isn’t the best approach. We need more Opinion pieces that make it clear that we’re headed closer to a religious war on our own soil over abortion, and that this deadlock is making the definition of “American” quite different from state to state. Most Americans, religious or otherwise, would be concerned about that.
We had a brilliant compromise imposed by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1973 that sought to make the definition of “American” the same in all our states, at least on the subject of abortion. It respected the rights of a woman to control her reproductive destiny while also respecting the authority of states to regulate the modalities of death. It was the best that we’re ever going to achieve in a highly pluralistic society, and we all should defend it as the type of compromise that is essential to governance of such a diverse people.
Now, shorn of snark about the proper consequences of “murder”, THAT’S the message we should be evangelizing.
25
I appreciate your take on Roe vs Wade but of course the religious right sees it quite differently. I have always wondered why abortion opponents never speak out loud of punishment for women. If they were successful in outlawing abortion I truly believe there would be criminal consequences for women.
I agree that Roe vs Wade was perhaps the best compromise but the religious right is not interested in compromise on this issue. "Evangelizing" the issue to the religious right by trying to convince them they have already gotten their best deal seems unlikely to sway them.
I do not see "snark" in pointing out the hypocrisy of the religious right's position.
I agree that Roe vs Wade was perhaps the best compromise but the religious right is not interested in compromise on this issue. "Evangelizing" the issue to the religious right by trying to convince them they have already gotten their best deal seems unlikely to sway them.
I do not see "snark" in pointing out the hypocrisy of the religious right's position.
12
There's no "snark" here. The truth was revealed and taken to it's real "truthiness"
Those religious beings who are offended by Roe v.Wade - vast numbers? - have no
right to impose their beliefs on the rest of us "vast numbers". There is no compromise regarding personal freedom - women, just like men, are entitled to it,
and must be permitted freedom of choice. The Republican party, with it's unfortunate projecting religion into politics continually defy separation of church
and state. Abortion politics are sandwiched into this ignorant, unconstitutional thinking.
Those religious beings who are offended by Roe v.Wade - vast numbers? - have no
right to impose their beliefs on the rest of us "vast numbers". There is no compromise regarding personal freedom - women, just like men, are entitled to it,
and must be permitted freedom of choice. The Republican party, with it's unfortunate projecting religion into politics continually defy separation of church
and state. Abortion politics are sandwiched into this ignorant, unconstitutional thinking.
18
p. kay:
As it happens, I agree with the notion that the religious have no right to impose their views on everyone else. But, then, neither do you, and neither does this author.
As it happens, I agree with the notion that the religious have no right to impose their views on everyone else. But, then, neither do you, and neither does this author.
The baby a victim is not,
Of post natal help, not a jot,
Not even a tittle,
Cf compassion, little,
Life after birth ain't worth a lot!
Of post natal help, not a jot,
Not even a tittle,
Cf compassion, little,
Life after birth ain't worth a lot!
64
Sickeningly trivializing.
2
There are two halves to the anti-abortion conversations: what they say to each other, and what they say to the general public.
To each other, they have always been clear they are protecting "babies" from "murder." They display the "bodies." They say "murder" all the time. They say "genocide" and keep a count of the murdered population.
To the rest of us, they say they are protecting the woman from the horror and danger of an abortion. But do they call themselves that? No. They call themselves "right to life" and they mean the baby they think is being murdered.
Protect the mother is a legal argument, used disingenuously, and among each other they are loud and proud of how they use that in the legal system, but really mean "saving babies."
In law it is called a pretext, as in a pretextual stop, as in traffic stops that are really for driving while black. It means using some false pretense of reason to do something you want to do for a very different reason. Protecting women is mere pretext, always has been, and they are proud of it.
Of course it is what they say. That is what a pretext is used for, to have something to say other than the truth. It doesn't have to make sense on close exam, just sound good enough.
To each other, they have always been clear they are protecting "babies" from "murder." They display the "bodies." They say "murder" all the time. They say "genocide" and keep a count of the murdered population.
To the rest of us, they say they are protecting the woman from the horror and danger of an abortion. But do they call themselves that? No. They call themselves "right to life" and they mean the baby they think is being murdered.
Protect the mother is a legal argument, used disingenuously, and among each other they are loud and proud of how they use that in the legal system, but really mean "saving babies."
In law it is called a pretext, as in a pretextual stop, as in traffic stops that are really for driving while black. It means using some false pretense of reason to do something you want to do for a very different reason. Protecting women is mere pretext, always has been, and they are proud of it.
Of course it is what they say. That is what a pretext is used for, to have something to say other than the truth. It doesn't have to make sense on close exam, just sound good enough.
198
I'm surprised we aren't hearing pro-choice arguments based on the First Amendment.
Opposition to choice and women's control of our lives and our bodies is based on religion. There is no other reason to deprive us of these fundamental rights.
Forcing us to submit to a "Christian" belief system is forcing people like me, a Jew, to believe that a fetus is a person, which I don't.
Ergo, my religious freedom is being violated along with my freedom and bodily integrity and my privacy and my right to health care.
I'm truly shocked also that women's rights aren't seen as a huge civil and human rights issue. Half the human race shouldn't be fighting for basic self-determination, the most basic of all being control of one's own body, in the 21st century, in a theoretically advanced, theoretically secular "democracy."
Opposition to choice and women's control of our lives and our bodies is based on religion. There is no other reason to deprive us of these fundamental rights.
Forcing us to submit to a "Christian" belief system is forcing people like me, a Jew, to believe that a fetus is a person, which I don't.
Ergo, my religious freedom is being violated along with my freedom and bodily integrity and my privacy and my right to health care.
I'm truly shocked also that women's rights aren't seen as a huge civil and human rights issue. Half the human race shouldn't be fighting for basic self-determination, the most basic of all being control of one's own body, in the 21st century, in a theoretically advanced, theoretically secular "democracy."
20
Anti-abortionists are actually anti-sex. What enrages them most is women having sex for any reason other than having a child. Sex is power. Women who have sex are exercising their sexual power, choosing who they have sex with, not who the father of her child but just sinful hedonism, just playing with her power.
Rattles all those repressed men who get weak-kneed at the thought of women flexing their raw sexual potency and never with the repressed weak-kneed men. So the men decided to take sexual power away from women and severely punish those women who continue to flout their sexuality by forcing them into pregnancy and if that isn't enough and they try to escape their pregnancy with abortion, make it capital murder. That'll show them who's boss.
Men don't care about women's bodies. They care what women do with their bodies, specially with others. They seduce unsuspecting, helpless men. Men aren't to blame. It's the evil in women, their power over men, their cavalier toying with decent, god-fearing, strong men who succumb to a woman's charms and descend into the depths of sin and depravity, reduced to whimpering quaking flesh-addicts by those sirens of Satan.
Pretext or foreplay? An abortion to these godly men is just an in-your-face reminder that she gave some other man what the godly guys want but never get. And they never stop thinking about.
Rattles all those repressed men who get weak-kneed at the thought of women flexing their raw sexual potency and never with the repressed weak-kneed men. So the men decided to take sexual power away from women and severely punish those women who continue to flout their sexuality by forcing them into pregnancy and if that isn't enough and they try to escape their pregnancy with abortion, make it capital murder. That'll show them who's boss.
Men don't care about women's bodies. They care what women do with their bodies, specially with others. They seduce unsuspecting, helpless men. Men aren't to blame. It's the evil in women, their power over men, their cavalier toying with decent, god-fearing, strong men who succumb to a woman's charms and descend into the depths of sin and depravity, reduced to whimpering quaking flesh-addicts by those sirens of Satan.
Pretext or foreplay? An abortion to these godly men is just an in-your-face reminder that she gave some other man what the godly guys want but never get. And they never stop thinking about.
17
Pro-lifers all say abortion is murder and they make no secret about it. In fact, they scream it out loud all the time. How could you not notice?
4
If a legal system that punishes women for having an abortion really thinks it's murder, you'd imagine that they'd issue a death certificate for the fetus. And why would men who got women pregnant not be burdened with a heavy responsibility for creating the life in the first place?
As long as conservative ideologues ignore the health and economic well-being of unwanted children, they should assume some responsibility for abortions that are done because the woman lacks resources to properly raise the child.
Some conservatives attack social services, welfare, food stamps, adequate maternal leave, raising the minimum wage and affordable health care, all of which are necessary for mothers to feel confident that they can bring a child into the world.
Others impose their religious beliefs on women who may not share them, claiming to know with certainty when some invisible spirit inhabits the zygote.
Many fetuses spontaneously abort because the complex set of circumstances are not precisely right for successful development. These circumstances extend outside the womb, and include the physical, emotional and economic circumstances of the woman.
As long as our society can't provide adequate safeguards for these factors, we should not be so quick to judge who should be required to bring a fetus to term.
As long as conservative ideologues ignore the health and economic well-being of unwanted children, they should assume some responsibility for abortions that are done because the woman lacks resources to properly raise the child.
Some conservatives attack social services, welfare, food stamps, adequate maternal leave, raising the minimum wage and affordable health care, all of which are necessary for mothers to feel confident that they can bring a child into the world.
Others impose their religious beliefs on women who may not share them, claiming to know with certainty when some invisible spirit inhabits the zygote.
Many fetuses spontaneously abort because the complex set of circumstances are not precisely right for successful development. These circumstances extend outside the womb, and include the physical, emotional and economic circumstances of the woman.
As long as our society can't provide adequate safeguards for these factors, we should not be so quick to judge who should be required to bring a fetus to term.
392
Gemli, strangely enough, said this in her (his?) second to last paragraph:
"Many fetuses spontaneously abort because the complex set of circumstances are not precisely right for successful development. These circumstances extend outside the womb, and include the physical, emotional and economic circumstances of the woman."
This sounds very similar to the arguments put forth by that "extreme right winger," who fought Claire McClasscal of Missouri for the Senate in the last election season. He said that women who were raped didn't get pregnant and, therefore, there was no need for an exception, to a ban on abortion, in cases of rape. He was roundly decried for promoting bad and scurillous science. You are doing the same thing.
"Many fetuses spontaneously abort because the complex set of circumstances are not precisely right for successful development. These circumstances extend outside the womb, and include the physical, emotional and economic circumstances of the woman."
This sounds very similar to the arguments put forth by that "extreme right winger," who fought Claire McClasscal of Missouri for the Senate in the last election season. He said that women who were raped didn't get pregnant and, therefore, there was no need for an exception, to a ban on abortion, in cases of rape. He was roundly decried for promoting bad and scurillous science. You are doing the same thing.
Your first point makes no sense and reeks of misandry.
The men are not consenting to the termination of the fetus by contributing sperm. If they are somehow taking responsibility for all future decisions of the mother by impregnating that mother, then you are really making a case that men must have equal input into any decision about the fetus - or you are making a truly ridiculous case that men are responsible for women and their decisions.
The men are not consenting to the termination of the fetus by contributing sperm. If they are somehow taking responsibility for all future decisions of the mother by impregnating that mother, then you are really making a case that men must have equal input into any decision about the fetus - or you are making a truly ridiculous case that men are responsible for women and their decisions.
@David Gottfried,
This isn't about conservative junk science. The body knows when a fetus isn't viable, and a woman knows when she can't give a child what it needs. Neither circumstance bodes well for the proper care and nurturing of a human life. Forcing a woman to bear and to raise an unwanted child doesn't only punish the mother.
This isn't about conservative junk science. The body knows when a fetus isn't viable, and a woman knows when she can't give a child what it needs. Neither circumstance bodes well for the proper care and nurturing of a human life. Forcing a woman to bear and to raise an unwanted child doesn't only punish the mother.
24