In the editorial, Paltrow and Asetoyer assert that South Dakota's ban on abortion could be used to punish women. That is odd because even the authors are aware and mention that South Dakota's ban specifically says, "(n)othing in this Act may be construed to subject the pregnant mother upon whom any abortion is performed or attempted to any criminal conviction and penalty."
They say that women will be imprisoned based on other state laws which they describe as saying the unborn child is a "legal person."
"If the unborn are legal persons, as numerous South Dakota laws assert, then a pregnant woman who has an abortion can be prosecuted as a murderer under already existing homicide laws."
This statement is wholly deceptive. South Dakota's criminal code and the fetal homicide statute in it but it clearly states in Section 151 that, "(t)his section does not apply to acts which cause the death of an unborn child if those acts were committed during any abortion, lawful or unlawful, to which the pregnant woman consented."
So South Dakota's abortion ban says that women can't be punished and South Dakota's fetal homicide law specifically states that the law doesn't apply to abortion yet Paltrow and Asetoyer are asserting that South Dakota women who have abortions could be prosecuted. What's their basis for this claim that clearly goes against clear wording of South Dakota's laws?
A single case in South Carolina (which has differently worded laws than South Dakota) where a woman was convicted for the death of her stillborn child. The prosecutors and the jury believed that the stillbirth was caused by the woman's cocaine use.
This kind of intentionally deceptive garbage is par for course for Lynn Paltrow. She's previously asserted that the federal Unborn Victims of Violence Act "creates the legal foundation for policing pregnancy and punishing women who carry their pregnancies to term" even though the law specifically states that "(n)othing in this section shall be construed to permit the prosecution–...of any woman with respect to her unborn child."
Posts
Abortion-choice advocates commonly ask pro-choicers what we think should be done to women who get abortions if abortion were illegal in this country.
ReplyDeletePro-lifers tend to either (1) avoid the question by saying it is not their place to determine specific punishments for breaking a law, (2) or say they think only the doctors who perform the abortions should be prosecuted--not the women who seek them, because the women are often victims, rather than perpetrators of the crime.
I see a bit of tactical wisdom in the first response, and a bit of truth in the second, but I have a difficult time buying either (as do the abortion-choicers).
Why not prosecute women who get abortions if abortion is illegal in this country? They are not responsible for committing the murder, but they are complicit in it when they ask that it be done. In the same way that the man who orders a "hit" is punished by law even though he was not the "hit man," a woman who orders the doctor to "hit" her baby should be legally responsible.
While some women are indeed victims, I think they are few and far between. You yourself read the pro-choice blogs and hear the testimonies of these girls. They know what they are doing. They know they are killing something. Even those who wish to say it is just a blob, and say they do not regret their abortion, often talk about how they cried afterwards. I've heard of one abortion clinic where the wall is littered with letters from the moms who abort their babies, to the babies they abort. These women know what they are doing, and they know it is morally wrong. And if there was a law against abortion, those who get abortions would also know it was legally wrong as well. Why would we let a woman who knows it is legally and morally wrong completely off the hook? What other law would we allow people to knowingly and willingly break without consequence?
I'm not suggesting that we punish the one who receives the abortion to the same extent we do the person who performed the abortion, but to let her go scott-free by saying she is just a victim seems a bit disengenuous on our part.
Hi anonymous,
ReplyDeleteI've explained my beliefs with regards to this question in previous posts here and here.
Why don't we prosecute people who attempt suicide?
Would we be able to prosecute an abortionist without the testimony of the woman?
Thanks for directing me to those other posts.
ReplyDeleteI see what you are saying, but even in “regular” plea deals we don’t exonerate the bad guy. Usually we agree to a reduced sentence or something similar And what about in those cases where we don’t need the woman to testify because the abortionist was caught in the act, or we found his records detailing all of the women he performed abortions for? Shouldn’t we prosecute the women in those cases for breaking the law?
Hi anonymous,
ReplyDeletePlea deals often vary. Aren't their often deals where some individual who would be otherwise prosecuted is let off or only given probation if they give up a bigger criminal?
The ability to prosecute abortionists isn't the only reason I'm not a proponent of punishing women who have abortions.
For example, would you be in favor of locking up individuals who try to find someone to assist them in suicide.
"Why don't we prosecute people who attempt suicide?"
ReplyDeleteI don't quite understand this comparison or differential. There's a difference. People who attempt to commit suicide are often in a depressed, altered state of mind and may not be aware of the risks of their actions. Wherein women who seek an abortion make a conscious decision, knowing the outcome of the abortion and the safety risks. Just to clearify.
BTW, I'm all for prosecuting the abortionist rather than the woman.
But as an afterthought, wouldn't having the woman go on the witness stand to testify against the abortionist and not only have to admit to the public that she had an abortion, but the intimate details of what happened still be humilitating and a punishment within itself (even if we don't intend to have the woman legally punished)?
ReplyDeleteHi Rachael,
ReplyDeleteThe point of the suicide question is to show that our laws don't always treat people/crimes involving the death of human beings exactly the same.
So you don't think women who walk into an abortion clinic are "depressed, altered state of mind and may not be aware of the risks of their actions?"
I think that describes a bunch of women who walk into abortion clinics. They often feel forced into abortion because they see no other choice and have no idea of the possible physical or psychological complications.
So you don't think women who walk into an abortion clinic are "depressed, altered state of mind and may not be aware of the risks of their actions?"
ReplyDeleteWell, actually I do agree with you there. Many of the women who experience an unplanned pregnancy and go into a crisis mode and may feel abortion is their only option. However, I was speaking of the minority of women who are militantly child-free and would get an abortion the minute their pregnancy test turned positive. But I can appreciate your comparison that the law doesn't always treat people/crimes involving the death of human beings exactly the same. Your comparing suicide with crminalization of abortion just kinda of hit home with me.