"Rebel conservative" says that if abortion is murder, women should go to jail for it (last two paragraphs):
"Blogger 'Harry834' asks an important question – If abortion is murder, how long should a woman serve for murdering her child?
This is a very crucial issue that the 'pro-life' movement needs to address. It would be intellectually dishonest to suggest the punishment would not include time in jail.
In my opinion, the length of time would depend entirely on the details of the case – as with any murder. There could be grounds for the charge could be reduced to manslaughter, on the grounds of diminished capacity; but she should face time in prison, otherwise it would be like a guy who murders his parents pleading for leniency because he is an orphan.
Whilst I thank Harry for his question, a more important question to ask, is how long should the person who carries out the abortion serve? In my opinion, life. They knowingly committed an act, with callous and cold disregard, it is pre-meditated murder - often for profit. Abortionists do not have the same feelings of perhaps being overwhelmed/scared etc that the mother does, there is no excuse."
Admire his honesty, but still a problem...
He implies that the doctor deserves a much harsher, and more certain, sentence than the woman. With the woman he paints examples of "mitigating circumstances" in that first paragraph quoted above.
My question: why the discrepency in punishments?
Rebel justifies the distinction by saying that the doctor "knowingly committed an act, with callous and cold disregard" and did it for "profit".
But if that's true, he's no different than a hired hitman. And the person who hired him - or her - was the pregnant woman.
Couldn't this woman be "callous and cold"? Like these women women who don't regret their abortions?
One of these women has commented here: "mellan kelly"
Also I'd also remind him that not every murderer will prove they had "diminished capacity". In fact the burden of proof is on the murder and her defense lawyer.
The good thing is that Rebel realizes this: "There could be grounds for the charge could be reduced to manslaughter, on the grounds of diminished capacity; but she should face time in prison, otherwise it would be like a guy who murders his parents pleading for leniency because he is an orphan." (from end of first paragraph)
Thank you, Rebel conservative for (attempting) intellectual honesty
Here's my other question:
Should "feelings of perhaps being overwhelmed/scared" necessarilly grant a murderer a lesser sentence?
I have a hard time with the fact that the hired hitman gets life in prison, but the person who hired him gets...ambiguity and mitigitating circumstances.