when abortion is made illegal

[InHim2002]

I have a few questions regarding the implementation of making abortion illegal - I don't want this topic to be a debate about abortion per se, I would like to focus on how the ban on abortion is going to be implemented.

For the sake of this argument i am assuming that life starts at conception and that there is a federal law stating this (this is because as far as i am aware the death penalty can only be applied to federal crimes)

1) What will be the punishment for women who have abortions? will the doctor or the woman be punished (or both)? what about women that perform their own abortions?

2) How will it be insured that women don't go abroad for abortions? will there be mandatory pregnancy testing for all women leaving the US or somesuch other test to ensure that they have not aborted whilst out of the country?

3) What about the 'morning after pill'? as far as I am aware that is a form of abortion would this be banned?

4) What about the pill? this can cause the termination of zycotes as it makes the womb unsuitable for them

I would be really interested in the answers to the above as I think that they are questions commonly missed in abortion debates.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Originally posted by InHim2002:
1) What will be the punishment for women who have abortions? will the doctor or the woman be punished (or both)? what about women that perform their own abortions?

They will be liable for the penalties for murder whereever the murder is performed. The woman and the doctor will be liable.

2) How will it be insured that women don't go abroad for abortions? will there be mandatory pregnancy testing for all women leaving the US or somesuch other test to ensure that they have not aborted whilst out of the country?

It is not within the purview of the US government to control what their citizens do while abroad. US laws only apply in their respective territories (whether state or federal). Women going abroad for abortions will be just like anyone going abroad for any reason. They will be subject to the laws of the local in which they are.

3) What about the 'morning after pill'? as far as I am aware that is a form of abortion would this be banned?

If it is banned, they will be subject to the laws regarding its banning.

4) What about the pill? this can cause the termination of zycotes as it makes the womb unsuitable for them

Again, a question that will be addressed by the law.

 

[Gina B]

Wow InHim, I just had pretty much this EXACTdiscussion with someone on another board! The person who asked these questions there was an atheist though, hopefully since you have the spirit in you you'll recognize how those thoughts and concerns just don't justify murder.

Are they just concerns you have, or are you really adament that abortion should remain legal?
Gina, former zygote.

 

[Pennsylvania Jim]

Originally posted by InHim2002:
...
For the sake of this argument i am assuming that life starts at conception and that there is a federal law stating this (this is because as far as i am aware the death penalty can only be applied to federal crimes)

That is not necessarily the case. It is a state matter, like any other murder. If a federal ruling or legislation clarified life from conception, then each state would treat is as murder according to their laws, some with and some without capital punishment.

1) What will be the punishment for women who have abortions? will the doctor or the woman be punished (or both)? what about women that perform their own abortions?

Presumably it would be treated as any other murder, in terms of punishment and also in terms of punishing all parties involved.

2) How will it be insured that women don't go abroad for abortions? will there be mandatory pregnancy testing for all women leaving the US or somesuch other test to ensure that they have not aborted whilst out of the country?

Contrary to Pastor Larry's answer, I think there would be some recourse since the woman carries another person out of the country in order to murder him/her. I don't know a lot about that but it seems to me that it would be so.

3) What about the 'morning after pill'? as far as I am aware that is a form of abortion would this be banned?

It should be for the reason you state.

4) What about the pill? this can cause the termination of zycotes as it makes the womb unsuitable for them...

??? I always assumed that the pill does not in any way cause an abortion, but I don't know for sure.

-PA Jim

 

[Karen]

Originally posted by InHim2002:
I have a few questions regarding the implementation of making abortion illegal - I don't want this topic to be a debate about abortion per se, I would like to focus on how the ban on abortion is going to be implemented.
.......I would be really interested in the answers to the above as I think that they are questions commonly missed in abortion debates.

If Roe v. Wade were overturned, we would go back to the 1972 situation, in which abortion was regulated by each state. Each state's laws that were in effect in 1972 or since amended would control for that state.
There would be very wide variation. In 1972, for example, Kansas had extremely loose abortion laws, as did New York. Missouri and Louisiana, among others, were very strict.
None, to my knowledge, pursued the death penalty for the woman.
In 1972, it is my understanding that on a practical basis, legal abortion was fairly accessible to 40% of the population, based on distribution of population, not just numbers of states in which it was legal. One of the main legal complaints against Roe v. Wade has always been that it instantly, by fiat, overturned 50 states' laws.
These issues and many more have been addressed a lot by the National Right to Life Committee.

Karen

 

[InHim2002]

thanks for the replies

It is not within the purview of the US government to control what their citizens do while abroad. US laws only apply in their respective territories (whether state or federal). Women going abroad for abortions will be just like anyone going abroad for any reason. They will be subject to the laws of the local in which they are.

would this not mean that it is only the poor that will be affected?

Are they just concerns you have, or are you really adament that abortion should remain legal?

they are concerns that I have - I haven't really seen this aspect of the abortion argument discussed before

 

[Pastor Larry]

Originally posted by InHim2002:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />It is not within the purview of the US government to control what their citizens do while abroad. US laws only apply in their respective territories (whether state or federal). Women going abroad for abortions will be just like anyone going abroad for any reason. They will be subject to the laws of the local in which they are.

would this not mean that it is only the poor that will be affected? </font>[/QUOTE]First, Jim's point may be valid. I don't know. Second, no it does not just affect the poor. Anyone can leave the country. The poor are not refused access to passports and train/plane tickets.

However, even if that were the case, it makes no difference. That is an argumentation that ignores the principle of the sanctity of human life. The child of the poor lady is just as much a person as the child of a rich lady. If it is wrong (and it is), then it is wrong for all.

 

[Dr. Bob]

Yes, the poor would be de facto discriminated against. Assume the cost of passport, transportation to a foreign country (even Mexico or Canada), loss of wages in a subsistance-level job, then the cost of the actual murder.

Part of the rationale behind Roe was this very real inequity for the poor.

 

[Pastor Larry]

So what are you saying?? That because abortion laws would de factor discriminate (something that I think lowers the meaning of discriminate) they should not be changed or something?? Somehow, I can't imagine that is what you are saying but your post does not seem clear?

 

[Dr. Bob]

Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
So what are you saying?? That because abortion laws would de factor discriminate (something that I think lowers the meaning of discriminate) they should not be changed or something?? Somehow, I can't imagine that is what you are saying but your post does not seem clear?

Yes, I believe that there are inherent problems in this issue, and NO, it IS something that needs to be changed. I simply posted some mitigating factors that, when abortion becomes illegal, we will have to face as a nation.

Back alley abortions WERE a genuine problem prior to 73. We must face that fact (albeit, a fact blown out of proportion by the pro-death industry).

So, to clarify, my answer is No and Yes.

 

[Catholic Dad]

Let me state at the outset that I am a Catholic (as if my handle did not give that away

) and I do not have the right to post here. However, I hope the Webmaster will indulge me in order to make one point.

Pennsylvania Jim wrote:

??? I always assumed that the pill does not in any way cause an abortion, but I don't know for sure.

My wife teaches NFP so I am familiar with this. The primary action of the pill is to prevent fertilization of the egg by the sperm. However, the level of medication needed to absolutely insure this can cause other side effects so the level of medication was reduced. Therefore, sometimes fertilization does occur. When that happens, the secondary action of the pill kicks in which causes the body to abort the fertilized egg. So yes, the pill can and does cause abortions. (although I do not have stats on this, it has been estimated that as many as 1 in 4 actions of the pill is abortifacient.)

Catholic Dad
(who will now go back to lurking as he should be.)

 

[Jim1999]

Let me state at the outset that I am a Catholic (as if my handle did not give that away ) and I do not have the right to post here. However, I hope the Webmaster will indulge me in order to make one point.

_________________________________________________

Catholic Dad:

As moderator, I thank you for acknowledging the BaptistBoard rules, both in posting and the fact that you will return to read only posture. Thank you.

As moderator, I will not delete your post and let the comment stand without further ado.

Again, thank you for noting the rules and future observation of said rules.

Cheers,

Jim

Moderator

 

[InHim2002]

Jim - thanks for leaving that post up.

Catholic Dad - thanks for the info - I did a quick google and came up with this:

Birth control pills work in two ways. They are a product that contracepts
and aborts. Don’t just take our word for it! The Physicians Desk Reference
commonly referred to as the PDR contains descriptions of drug mechanisms
(how they work). Below are some references referring to the most commonly
prescribed oral contraceptive pills taken from the 1995 PDR. The section
of each passage that is in bold is the abortive mechanism. Endometrium
is another word for the lining of the uterus. Any time the word
implantation is used this is referring to an already fertilized egg or a
new human being.

Page numbers are given. "Combination oral contraceptives act by suppression
of gonadotropins. Although the primary mechanism of this action is
inhibition of ovulation, other alterations include changes in the cervical
mucus, which increases the difficulty of sperm entry into the uterus, and
changes in the endometrium which reduce the likelihood of implantation."
(The PDR, 1995 page 1775) referring to pills made by Ortho "Although the
primary mechanism of this action is inhibition of ovulation other alterations
include changes in the cervical mucus (which increases the difficulty of
sperm entry into the uterus, and the endometrium (which may reduce the
likelihood of implantation)." (The PDR, 1995 page 2461) referring to pills
made by Syntex "changes in… the endometrium (which reduces the likelihood
of implantation)." (The PDR, 1995 page 1782) referring to ortho-tri "other
altercations include…changes in the endometrium which reduce the
likelihood of implantation."

(The PDR, 1995 page 2693 and 2743) referring
to Lo/Ovral, Ovral, and Triphasil "…changes in the endometrium which reduce
the likelihood of implantation." (The PDR, 1995, page 1744) referring to
pills made by Organon In addition to the PDR consult the medical books and
journals! "These data suggest that the morphological changes observed in
the endometrium of OC users have functional significance and provide evidence
that reduced endometrial receptivity does indeed contribute to the contraceptive
efficacy of Ocs." (Stephen G. Somkuti , et al., "The effects of oral
contraceptive pills on markers of endometrial receptivity," Fertility
and Sterility, Volume 65, #3, March 1996, page 488) "Progestins produce an
endometrium that is unfavorable to blastocyst implantation." (Williams
Obstetrics page 122, Cunningham, et al, Stamford CT: Appleton & Lange, 1993,
page 1323) "The production of glycogen by the endometrial glands is
diminished by the ingestion of oral contraceptives, which impairs the
survival of the blastocyst in the uterine cavity." Danforths Obstetrics
and Gynecology (Philedelphia: J.B. Lippincott Co., 1994, 7th edition, page
626)

source

so does this mean that the pill will no longer be allowed to be used? will only barrier methods of contraception be acceptable?

 

[Karen]

Originally posted by InHim2002:
......
so does this mean that the pill will no longer be allowed to be used? will only barrier methods of contraception be acceptable?

The "pill" was generally legal in the 50 states in 1972 pre- Roe v. Wade, not addressed in the laws. So there would have to be a law passed in a given state to make it illegal.
I would expect that would be very hard to do.

I am not a doctor, but the research I have done, including talking with some Christian ob/gyns and family practitioners is that the information you provided is not as clear-cut as it would seem. At the very least, there is no "the pill". There are many varieties and dosages. Some of the effects in your link are perhaps from lower dosages than are normally prescribed.

Karen