If abortion is murder, shouldn't the women be prosecuted?

[McCulloch]

I do think that abortion is murder because it is equivalent to murder, regardless of whether the fetus is a viable life or not.

So do you support criminal prosecution for the mothers who seek abortions? Even the ones who had been raped? Why not?

No, while the action is equivalent the punishment should not be. Killing a fetus is equivalent to killing a 2 yr old baby, but the mother who had the abortion should not be prosecuted because her intent is not equivalent to a murder's intent.

If abortion is murder, should the women seeking and getting abortions be prosecuted? What particular legal principle is being applied to excuse murder?



_________________
Note: for the purposes of this debate, assume that it has been shown that abortion is murder. This is not the place to debate whether this is true.

[Goat]

If this is from a religious perspective, then shouldn't the "god" of the Judeo-Christian religion be prosecuted for all the spontaneous abortions (a.k.a miscarriages) as well as the billions of innocents he killed with his actions (such as the flood) according to the bible and assuming you believe it's real?!

Very often foetuses are aborted as they are just clumps of cells, should we also prosecute those who have treatment for cancer - after all they are destroying just the same?

Just a quick note(please assume the bible is true for this debate). the bible says that humans are concieved in iniquity.which means sin is in the genes so to speak. Gods standards are not yours either so next time you start talking of innocents remember that a Holy God does not think like you and me.

Assuming that God is true, the support for 'Original Sin' such as you describe it is not biblical. It is taking a couple of sentences of Paul out of context, and then slapping on the assumptions of St Augustine outside of the bible.

How can you deny original sin when Adam (if you believe him) sinned and was the first man created? I think it is YOU who is taking and corrupting scripture my friend and the only reason is so that you can carry on your life the way you want to. And please dont try to say im judging you because i was once of the same opinion.

Very simply... the Book of Genesis is a 'how so' story, saying why things are like they are, it isn't the literal truth. Next, something is not a sin if you are ignorant... and until Adam and Eve actually ate from the tree of knowledge of Good and Evil, they were ignorant of Good and Evil. To proclaim it to be an original sin is to not understand the text... or to try to understand it through the eyes of Paul, whose Jewish credentials are suspect at the very best. I am sorry, but your taking Jewish scripture, and putting a very non-Jewish interpretation on it. So, no, the concept of 'original sin', as given by the Christians is not inherent into the text. The Jewish faith does not believe in 'Original Sin'.. , and there are a number of Christians that doubt the validity of the concept too.

[PRESBYTERIAN]

If this is from a religious perspective, then shouldn't the "god" of the Judeo-Christian religion be prosecuted for all the spontaneous abortions (a.k.a miscarriages) as well as the billions of innocents he killed with his actions (such as the flood) according to the bible and assuming you believe it's real?!

Very often foetuses are aborted as they are just clumps of cells, should we also prosecute those who have treatment for cancer - after all they are destroying just the same?

Just a quick note(please assume the bible is true for this debate). the bible says that humans are concieved in iniquity.which means sin is in the genes so to speak. Gods standards are not yours either so next time you start talking of innocents remember that a Holy God does not think like you and me.

Assuming that God is true, the support for 'Original Sin' such as you describe it is not biblical. It is taking a couple of sentences of Paul out of context, and then slapping on the assumptions of St Augustine outside of the bible.

How can you deny original sin when Adam (if you believe him) sinned and was the first man created? I think it is YOU who is taking and corrupting scripture my friend and the only reason is so that you can carry on your life the way you want to. And please dont try to say im judging you because i was once of the same opinion.

Very simply... the Book of Genesis is a 'how so' story, saying why things are like they are, it isn't the literal truth. Next, something is not a sin if you are ignorant... and until Adam and Eve actually ate from the tree of knowledge of Good and Evil, they were ignorant of Good and Evil. To proclaim it to be an original sin is to not understand the text... or to try to understand it through the eyes of Paul, whose Jewish credentials are suspect at the very best. I am sorry, but your taking Jewish scripture, and putting a very non-Jewish interpretation on it. So, no, the concept of 'original sin', as given by the Christians is not inherent into the text. The Jewish faith does not believe in 'Original Sin'.. , and there are a number of Christians that doubt the validity of the concept too.

Where does sin originate then. and dont say it doesnt exist or some crazy thing like that. if i came to your house and pinched your car you would soon understand the concept

[flitzerbiest]

Where does sin originate then. and dont say it doesnt exist or some crazy thing like that. if i came to your house and pinched your car you would soon understand the concept.

Angst over the theft of a car might establish the notion of crime and of an ethical system, but it does not establish the concept of sin. The victim of theft might be outraged that it was taken, and the civil authorities might arrest the perpetrator, but this is a far cry from saying that God (WTHTM) is personally offended and will exact retributive justice.

[Ridgesayshi]

If it was considered murder, then why is it legal?

The pro-life advocates believe that abortion should be illegal, since it is the deliberate and unjustified killing of a human. They even sometimes bring in a comparison with the holocaust, where it has been determined that the mass killings were, in fact, murder even though legally sanctioned.

My point in this debate thread is that the pro-lifers do not hold that position consistently unless they also advocate prosecution for murder of the mothers who seek abortion services.

Would this be the same for saying that the death penalty should be legal? Killing a person[s], is still considered murder. Justified or not, you're still taking someones life away.

[McCulloch]

Would this be the same for saying that the death penalty should be legal? Killing a person[s], is still considered murder. Justified or not, you're still taking someones life away.

Not all killing of people is considered murder. A soldier takes someone's life away in combat. An executioner takes someone's life away in service of a duly convened court.

The pro-life activists loudly and persistently claim that abortion takes a person's life away and that it fits the criterion to be called murder (premeditated, deliberate and not legally, ethically or morally justified). If you are for or against capital punishment, is an issue for another debate. But those who stand with the pro-lifers, to be consistent should advocate that those who seek or receive abortions should be charged with murder.

... but this is a far cry from saying that God (WTHTM) is personally offended and will exact retributive justice.

I could not find WTHTM in the Acronym Finder.

[Wootah]

You know what is going on here. Atheists trying to play pharisee.

Abortion is murder but not all murders need to be punished by us. I would certainly stop a serial abortionist and certainly think counselling a person on the violence they are about to unleash. But what would prison serve for a person that has committed abortion?

Would a soul stand a better chance of going to heaven and receiving Jesus by going to jail or not is probably the only issue for a Christian. What does this person need to be receptive to Jesus would be my concern as well as protection for others in the community. As an abortionist really isn't going to harm others the way a murderer is what reason is there to lock them up?

[inspacewetrust]

Wouldn't masturbation be considered a form of abortion? We have a lot of murderers on our hands, boys and girls.

-DB

[Goat]

You know what is going on here. Atheists trying to play pharisee.

Abortion is murder but not all murders need to be punished by us. I would certainly stop a serial abortionist and certainly think counselling a person on the violence they are about to unleash. But what would prison serve for a person that has committed abortion?

If abortion is murder, why does the bible have a method for inducing miscarriages in it as a test?'

[Wootah]

You know what is going on here. Atheists trying to play pharisee.

Abortion is murder but not all murders need to be punished by us. I would certainly stop a serial abortionist and certainly think counselling a person on the violence they are about to unleash. But what would prison serve for a person that has committed abortion?

If abortion is murder, why does the bible have a method for inducing miscarriages in it as a test?'

Please quote so I know the reference.

[McCulloch]

You know what is going on here. Atheists trying to play pharisee.

I would prefer the term legalist in that the Pharisees were a much maligned (by Christians) group of Jews that set the foundations for to what is known as Rabbinical Judaism.

Abortion is murder but not all murders need to be punished by us.

Murder is a legal term meaning unlawful, unjustified, deliberate homicide. Are you trying to make the case that not all murders should be prosecuted? What other exceptions to prosecution for murder would you allow, or is abortion your sole and only case?

I would certainly stop a serial abortionist and certainly think counselling a person on the violence they are about to unleash. But what would prison serve for a person that has committed abortion?

What would prison serve for a person who has committed any other type of murder? The debate here is not about the effectiveness or appropriateness of the sentences handed out by the judicial system but the consistency of calling abortion murder without advocating that it be treated as such.

Would a soul stand a better chance of going to heaven and receiving Jesus by going to jail or not is probably the only issue for a Christian. What does this person need to be receptive to Jesus would be my concern as well as protection for others in the community.

Our judicial system should not take theological concerns into account, right?

As an abortionist really isn't going to harm others the way a murderer is what reason is there to lock them up?

This hits at the heart of the debate. If you define a zygote, an embryo and a fetus as persons, then an abortionist will harm many others.

Wouldn't masturbation be considered a form of abortion? We have a lot of murderers on our hands, boys and girls.

[crude joke]That would all depend on whether you used your hands or something else. [/crude joke]

For most pro-lifers, a life begins at conception. Thus anything that happens to the gametes prior to that event is OK.