Easiest bit of "pro-life" RHETORIC to prove phony.....or to show the "pro-lifer" for a radical extremist. How? Ask them. "In a situation where abortion is illegal....in a state where death by lethal injection is the punishment for pre-meditated murder.....would you support a woman who self-induces an abortion say via RU-486.....being executed? Yes or No?" (Proof? Watch the "pro-life" responses to this thread....especially subject changes, rather than answer that question directly. If we're lucky...we may get ONE honest answer.)
If abortion was illegal, women would do it secretly and they wouldn't get caught. The goal of making abortion illegal is simply to make abortion less "normalized" and socially acceptable. While women who have abortions probably wouldn't get caught, abortion being illegal causes abortion to be a taboo action, which would cause less abortions.
How many times in how many threads where you are proved wrong will you repost and repost the same claims. Making abortion illegal has NEVER cut the number of abortions. Your """The goal of making abortion illegal is simply to make abortion less "normalized" and socially acceptable" So it isn't to save "innocent lives" it's purpose is to shame/control women....???? Abortion IS normal. And you saying that women wouldn't get caught is a dodge avoiding the OP's question.
Okay, I'll directly answer the OP's question. As Gorn captain said in previous threads, the RU-486 looks very similar to other substances. If abortion was illegal, there would be no way to prove if the woman swallowed an RU-486, or another substance.
I wouldn't count on an honest answer. I take the Dawkins approach and simply demand evidence from claim-makers. I'd like to see how "human life begins at conception," or how "a zygote is a person." I'd like to see proof of these important claims that change people's lives... something other than "It's in the Bible" or "Because it's what I believe." I'd especially like to see evidence that "abortion is murder."
Sam won't answer the question....but in his dodge....he contradicted himself. He BOTH claims that it would be "taboo and would cause less abortions".... AND that "women would do it and they wouldn't get caught". If they wouldn't get caught?....how is it a taboo to have a TOOTHLESS law???? - - - Updated - - - http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=325774&page=11 http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=322479&page=7
That wasn't the question, Sam. The woman was "caught"....indicted and convicted of self-inducing an abortion...what you CLAIM you believe is "murder"... if capital punishment is the sentence in that state, would you oppose her being executed? yes or no? - - - Updated - - - I don't....maybe one will try. But most "pro-lifers" see the "trap"....and it's a trap THEY built with their hyperbolic rhetoric that "Abortion is murder". Start questioning them on that belief.....they back-down, almost every time. Or...try to change the subject or answer a question that wasn't even asked. Almost every time.
If a woman was caught self administering an RU-486, she wouldn't get in any legal trouble. Why? As you said in this thread, http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=337722, an RU-486 looks very similar to other medications and substances. There's no way to prove what the woman was taking.
Still want to dodge the question. Hypothesize all your objections are answered....the woman has been caught, indicted, prosecuted, and convicted of "child murder", i.e. a self-induced abortion via RU-486....in a state where death by lethal injection is the punishment for pre-meditated murder..... would you even OPPOSE that woman being executed? Yes or No?"
I am not dodging the question. there's no way to prove if a woman took an RU-486, or another medication.
So you have never heard of blood tests then Sam? I'm pretty sure that if you can be made to give a blood test on suspicion of being over the alcohol limit they will make a woman have one on suspicion of murder. So the question remains, this woman .. lets call her Jane Roe .. has been charged with the 1st degree murder of her 'child', she is in a state that has the death penalty for premeditated 1st degree murder and the toxicology reports on her blood show she did have RU-486 in her system. Now the definition of 1st degree murder is - "First-degree murder is any murder that is willful and premeditated." It can be shown that she was willful in her act, and that the act was premeditated .. now do you support the death penalty of that state for this crime .. yes or no?
If that State regarded a fetus as a human being then legally lethal injection could be supported in such a scenario and, I'll bet, (in your fantasy-State) abortions for convenience-sake would be quite rare to non-existent because they would be considered strictly immoral as evidenced by their laws. Compared to the U.S. today, a developing human fetus is held in much higher regard than its murderer in your fantasy State. Yes or No?
That's Sams "taboo" law. Let's say the woman doesn't view abortion as immoral. IN YOUR OPINION....would you support her being executed?
Why not, isn't abortion 'murder' to you and even worse a willful and premeditated murder. A bit hypocritical to state abortion is murder and then not support the penalties imposed for the crime don't you think? - - - Updated - - - Why are you repeating the same fallacy when I have already answered this inane comment So you have never heard of blood tests then Sam? I'm pretty sure that if you can be made to give a blood test on suspicion of being over the alcohol limit they will make a woman have one on suspicion of murder.
I just gave you a way to prove it, Sam. People have been convicted of murder on eyewitness testimony....without one bit of gunpower residue on their hands or the weapon being found. Unless you are a 17 year old "Gil Grissom" or "Horatio Caine"...with God-like powers....you CANNOT say it is "impossible" to prove that a woman swallowed RU-486. You just don't want to answer the question....because, once again, it would prove your RHETORIC on abortion isn't what you REALLY believe. You do NOT beleive "abortion is murder". If you do...then answer the question. If you don't...answer the question. But NOT answering it....proves the latter.
In a situation like that, I think the woman should get about 20 years in prison, if abortion was illegal.
Making something illegal does not stop it happening .. the death penalty for murders does not stop people murdering, and just to add some evidence to the fact that the death penalty DOES NOT make them rare, in fact states with the death penalty have a HIGHER murder rate than those that don't - Source - http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/det...alty-have-had-consistently-lower-murder-rates what makes you think that making abortion illegal will be any different, given that it hasn't in any country in the world or in history. .. wishful thinking perhaps!
So please do tell us why someone murdering a 5 year old deserves the death penalty while a woman 'murdering' a zef does not .. why are you placing a higher value on the life of the five year old than on the zef, according to you they are the same .. or is it more truthful to say that in reality you actually don't see them as the same.
If a woman shoots a 5 year old, deliberately and with pre-medititation.....would you only give her 20 years? - - - Updated - - - This...is where poor Sam....screwed up. He cannot answer that question without contradicting other things that he has said in the past about abortion. And so...he will be hard-pressed to answer you or me..and I'm thinking will want to dodge again, until we force him to do so.
