TRUMP: "There has to be some form of punishment" for women who have abortions
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 08:56:06 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  TRUMP: "There has to be some form of punishment" for women who have abortions
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6
Author Topic: TRUMP: "There has to be some form of punishment" for women who have abortions  (Read 4719 times)
RI
realisticidealist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,713


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #50 on: March 30, 2016, 07:40:49 PM »

Well, they should be, just as anyone who solicits murder for hire. But I don't support the death penalty, obviously.
Logged
Sprouts Farmers Market ✘
Sprouts
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,749
Italy


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: 1.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #51 on: March 30, 2016, 07:42:11 PM »

Well, they should be, just as anyone who solicits murder for hire. But I don't support the death penalty, obviously.

Agreed, this is completely non-controversial hysteria. I'd even say a misdemeanor as light as that sounds due to some circumstances of undue pressure, but it's certainly a crime of some degree.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,248


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #52 on: March 30, 2016, 07:44:40 PM »

Because women who seek abortions usually have much more sympathetic motivations, and because, if we're being honest about what sorts of laws a decent society would or should actually tolerate, punishing them is simply impracticable to do in any way that's subjectively reasonable.

I guess, but I still think the people who want to ban abortion but don't want to punish the women should not call abortion murder if they don't intend to punish the woman. It's hypocritical. Why call it murder if you don't intend to treat it like murder?

You're right, actually. This is a good reason to prefer a word like 'homicide'. There are all sorts of types of homicide with all sorts of types of consequences. Unfortunately, 'abortion is homicide' comes across as the sort of technical statement that makes most people's eyes glaze over and makes for terrible copy.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Atlas pro-lifers are way nastier about it than pro-lifers I know in other contexts. I'm not sure if this is because of selection bias in my offline life, the fact that Atlas is so overwhelmingly male, the fact that I live in Massachusetts, or some combination of the three.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,960
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #53 on: March 30, 2016, 07:48:23 PM »

Atlas pro-lifers are way nastier about it than pro-lifers I know in other contexts. I'm not sure if this is because of selection bias in my offline life, the fact that Atlas is so overwhelmingly male, the fact that I live in Massachusetts, or some combination of the three.

I'd wager that the average pro-life activist would tend to have even nastier views on the matter. The average person who votes "no in most cases" in a poll probably not, though. From what I've seen, most Americans tend to fall somewhere on the spectrum rather than having clear-cut views.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,248


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #54 on: March 30, 2016, 07:52:10 PM »
« Edited: March 30, 2016, 07:54:31 PM by LIVE THE DREAM. PURGE THOSE BOZOS »

Atlas pro-lifers are way nastier about it than pro-lifers I know in other contexts. I'm not sure if this is because of selection bias in my offline life, the fact that Atlas is so overwhelmingly male, the fact that I live in Massachusetts, or some combination of the three.

I'd wager that the average pro-life activist would tend to have even nastier views on the matter. The average person who votes "no in most cases" in a poll probably not, though. From what I've seen, most Americans tend to fall somewhere on the spectrum rather than having clear-cut views.

Right, because clear-cut views tend to be subjectively unreasonable. 'A mentally and physically healthy woman in her late twenties or early thirties should be allowed to abort in the third trimester on a whim' is a subjectively unreasonable position, as is 'a fifteen-year-old girl who has been raped by her uncle shouldn't be allowed to take RU486', even though those are the views that make the most 'sense' according to most coherent ethical frameworks. Most pro-lifers I know would deeply want the fifteen-year-old not to abort but would also be squeamish at the idea of legally prohibiting her from doing so. Some of these people are in fact activists for that position; they just don't have very loud voices.
Logged
#TheShadowyAbyss
TheShadowyAbyss
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,027
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Political Matrix
E: -5.81, S: -3.64

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #55 on: March 30, 2016, 07:56:42 PM »

Atlas pro-lifers are way nastier about it than pro-lifers I know in other contexts. I'm not sure if this is because of selection bias in my offline life, the fact that Atlas is so overwhelmingly male, the fact that I live in Massachusetts, or some combination of the three.

I'd wager that the average pro-life activist would tend to have even nastier views on the matter. The average person who votes "no in most cases" in a poll probably not, though. From what I've seen, most Americans tend to fall somewhere on the spectrum rather than having clear-cut views.

Right, because clear-cut views tend to be subjectively unreasonable. 'A mentally and physically healthy woman in her late twenties or early thirties should be allowed to abort in the third trimester on a whim' is a subjectively unreasonable position, as is 'a fifteen-year-old girl who has been raped by her uncle shouldn't be allowed to take RU486', even though those are the views that make the most 'sense' according to most coherent ethical frameworks.

That is why I don't understand the extremist Pro-Lifer's who do NOT want ANY exceptions in the case of RAPE, INCEST or the LIFE OF THE MOTHER. saying it's a gift from God is very scarring and degrading to the raped woman. Imagine carrying that child to term and it being a constant reminder of your rape? How would you feel? A woman or child should NEVER be forced to carry their rapists child EVER.

I believe women should have the choice after consulting their doctor whether or not to terminate a pregnancy, it is very hard on a woman to make that choice, it's not like they go and willy nilly get an abortion.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,248


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #56 on: March 30, 2016, 07:59:39 PM »
« Edited: March 30, 2016, 08:01:21 PM by LIVE THE DREAM. PURGE THOSE BOZOS »

Atlas pro-lifers are way nastier about it than pro-lifers I know in other contexts. I'm not sure if this is because of selection bias in my offline life, the fact that Atlas is so overwhelmingly male, the fact that I live in Massachusetts, or some combination of the three.

I'd wager that the average pro-life activist would tend to have even nastier views on the matter. The average person who votes "no in most cases" in a poll probably not, though. From what I've seen, most Americans tend to fall somewhere on the spectrum rather than having clear-cut views.

Right, because clear-cut views tend to be subjectively unreasonable. 'A mentally and physically healthy woman in her late twenties or early thirties should be allowed to abort in the third trimester on a whim' is a subjectively unreasonable position, as is 'a fifteen-year-old girl who has been raped by her uncle shouldn't be allowed to take RU486', even though those are the views that make the most 'sense' according to most coherent ethical frameworks.

That is why I don't understand the extremist Pro-Lifer's who do NOT want ANY exceptions in the case of RAPE, INCEST or the LIFE OF THE MOTHER. saying it's a gift from God is very scarring and degrading to the raped woman. Imagine carrying that child to term and it being a constant reminder of your rape? How would you feel? A woman or child should NEVER be forced to carry their rapists child EVER.

I believe women should have the choice after consulting their doctor whether or not to terminate a pregnancy, it is very hard on a woman to make that choice, it's not like they go and willy nilly get an abortion.

The standard counterargument to this is that there's apparently a statistic floating around out there that vastly more women who abort after rape regret aborting than women who don't abort regret not aborting, and I'm willing and desirous to believe that that's the case, but I haven't actually seen the statistic myself and it seems like the sort of survey question that's tailor-made to get dishonest responses.

I've actually never met anybody who doesn't believe in life of the mother exceptions but I'm sure for every terrible position there are HPs willing to hold it.
Logged
hotdish
Newbie
*
Posts: 8


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #57 on: March 30, 2016, 08:00:16 PM »

How exactly are women who have abortions getting pregnant in the first place? Not having accessible and affordable birth control or not being educated on the correct usage of birth control? Even the most effective methods of birth control can sometimes fail. So how are women still managing to get pregnant? Women generally can't get pregnant on their own. And what could possibly drive them to seek abortions?

I suppose that women could all refuse to ever have sex with men and we would never need to have discussions like this again, but Trump would have plenty of obnoxious things to say about women who don't put out as well.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,960
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #58 on: March 30, 2016, 08:01:03 PM »

Atlas pro-lifers are way nastier about it than pro-lifers I know in other contexts. I'm not sure if this is because of selection bias in my offline life, the fact that Atlas is so overwhelmingly male, the fact that I live in Massachusetts, or some combination of the three.

I'd wager that the average pro-life activist would tend to have even nastier views on the matter. The average person who votes "no in most cases" in a poll probably not, though. From what I've seen, most Americans tend to fall somewhere on the spectrum rather than having clear-cut views.

Right, because clear-cut views tend to be subjectively unreasonable. 'A mentally and physically healthy woman in her late twenties or early thirties should be allowed to abort in the third trimester on a whim' is a subjectively unreasonable position, as is 'a fifteen-year-old girl who has been raped by her uncle shouldn't be allowed to take RU486', even though those are the views that make the most 'sense' according to most coherent ethical frameworks. Most pro-lifers I know would deeply want the fifteen-year-old not to abort but would also be squeamish at the idea of legally prohibiting her from doing so. Some of these people are in fact activists for that position; they just don't have very loud voices.

I'm not sure why the "subjectively" qualifier is necessary here. Obviously it's subjective in that people will have different positions (and indeed I'm sure there are a good number of people who would agree with each statement), but that doesn't mean that beliefs in this area should be exempted from judgments of objective morality.

Of course I believe that it's possible for someone to be both pro-life and oppose these extreme kinds of restrictions. In fact, I would argue it wouldn't be inconsistent for someone to view both abortion and abortion restrictions as immoral. I think this can be derived from objective principles.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,248


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #59 on: March 30, 2016, 08:03:23 PM »
« Edited: March 30, 2016, 08:06:10 PM by LIVE THE DREAM. PURGE THOSE BOZOS »

I'm not sure why the "subjectively" qualifier is necessary here. Obviously it's subjective in that people will have different positions (and indeed I'm sure there are a good number of people who would agree with each statement), but that doesn't mean that beliefs in this area should be exempted from judgments of objective morality.

Tic from the way I write in some of my theology papers.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Oh, yeah, there are a ton of people who believe that. On my less stridently Catholic days I believe it myself.

(The profile--letter-reversing pun intended--of the types of activists I was alluding to above, by the way, is: Young, well-educated, Catholic women who I in many cases met through Tolkien fandom.)
Logged
Suburbia
bronz4141
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,684
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #60 on: March 30, 2016, 09:48:30 PM »

He's speaking his mind, even if it can be extreme. Look at the crazy far left and the "abortion full on demand" talk.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,693
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #61 on: March 30, 2016, 09:54:45 PM »

The gender gap is going to be YYUUUGE this election.

There's actually per just about all polls, no real gender gap on abortion. In fact some have actually shown that men are more likely to be pro-choice.

But I can see it being pretty big for other obvious reasons...and actually Trump attacking the women here instead of taking the standard pro-lifer talking point of only attacking the doctors might have an impact there.
Logged
Illiniwek
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,865
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #62 on: March 30, 2016, 09:56:05 PM »

My gosh he's stupid. He must be trying to lose on purpose... I just hate though how he will eventually get a pass due to his later excuse. I hope democrats are effecive at hammering him on all of the dumb sh*t he says.
Logged
i4indyguy
Rookie
**
Posts: 171
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #63 on: March 30, 2016, 10:39:30 PM »

It strikes me as odd that there has been near universal condemnation of the idea that women should suffer legal repercussions for engaging in an abortion (amongst the pro-life right).  A case could be made that doctors are bound by professional creed to provide the service requested by the patient, so long as it is compatible with the Hippocratic oath, and professional standards (concerns about the fetus aside).

But what of the culpability of the pregnant woman??  In what framework could she possibly have less responsibility for the abhorrent practice of abortion than the doctor who has the special skills to perform the procedure?    SHE got pregnant. Not the Dr.  SHE pursued the abortion. Not the Dr. SHE paid for the procedure. Not the DR.

IF abortion is to be regarded as a grave evil and injustice, absent political calculations, the woman is obviously much more culpable than the Dr.

Which brings me to this conclusion....

Jumping on women for wanting to end a pregnancy is politically toxic, because there simply aren't enough hard-line pro lifers to safely take that position.   MUCH easier to threaten prosecution, professional censure, or defunding for the extremely small portion of people that provide the service, rather than the much more potent voting cohort that may avail themselves of that service at some point.
Logged
TJ in Oregon
TJ in Cleve
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,952
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: 6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #64 on: March 30, 2016, 10:53:55 PM »

It strikes me as odd that there has been near universal condemnation of the idea that women should suffer legal repercussions for engaging in an abortion (amongst the pro-life right).  A case could be made that doctors are bound by professional creed to provide the service requested by the patient, so long as it is compatible with the Hippocratic oath, and professional standards (concerns about the fetus aside).

But what of the culpability of the pregnant woman??  In what framework could she possibly have less responsibility for the abhorrent practice of abortion than the doctor who has the special skills to perform the procedure?    SHE got pregnant. Not the Dr.  SHE pursued the abortion. Not the Dr. SHE paid for the procedure. Not the DR.

IF abortion is to be regarded as a grave evil and injustice, absent political calculations, the woman is obviously much more culpable than the Dr.

Which brings me to this conclusion....

Jumping on women for wanting to end a pregnancy is politically toxic, because there simply aren't enough hard-line pro lifers to safely take that position.   MUCH easier to threaten prosecution, professional censure, or defunding for the extremely small portion of people that provide the service, rather than the much more potent voting cohort that may avail themselves of that service at some point.

Much like the drug war, it's much easier to go after the small number of providers than the large number of customers. We should probably ask ourselves, which is a more effective way to combat abortion? Imposing penalties on the doctor clearly is. If you make it so no one is willing to perform abortions, then you don't need to worry about rounding up the mothers and fining them.
Logged
dax00
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,422


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #65 on: March 30, 2016, 11:42:34 PM »

He hasn't said anything specific about what kind of punishment. I don't think it's fair just yet to speculate on the severity of such a punishment. I don't even think Trump cares about abortion.
Logged
IceSpear
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,841
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #66 on: March 31, 2016, 12:12:02 AM »

I used to support very harsh punishments for women who have abortions a la beheading and other cruel punishment.

...wtf

Atlas never ceases to amaze.
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,856
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #67 on: March 31, 2016, 12:22:09 AM »
« Edited: March 31, 2016, 12:23:47 AM by Virginia »

My gosh he's stupid. He must be trying to lose on purpose... I just hate though how he will eventually get a pass due to his later excuse. I hope democrats are effecive at hammering him on all of the dumb sh*t he says.

Oh they will be. For one, they have already seen what didn't work, and the #NeverTrump campaign might actually be yielding fruit (can't say definitively right now, though)

Second, it's important to remember that most people don't like Trump at all. The reason he seems like he has mile-thick teflon is because he appeals strongly to a plurality of the Republican base. This makes him like a wall in their primary, but once he gets into the general electorate, he's damaged goods - big time. He would have to work extremely hard and spend a lot of money just to be even remotely close to competitive, and it would take Clinton all of 1 month or less to tear him down in attack ads based on the 2389102312 offensive/degrading things he's said on camera.

If he ever was electable, he surely isn't now. Period.
Logged
Why
Unbiased
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 612
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #68 on: March 31, 2016, 01:20:45 AM »

Let's leave the women alone and just punish the lowlife protesters who harass them, kTrump?

If people protesting against abortion break the law then they should be punished according to the law. If there protesting is within the law then they are doing nothing wrong and should be allowed to continue.
People who kill abortionists or women who are seeking or have had an abortion are totally wrong in their actions and should receive the fullest punishment of the law, the death penalty if that is the law and it is judged appropriate in the individual circumstances of the case. If they kill an unborn child it should be considered in the same way as if they had killed a newly born baby by the same method.
Logged
Why
Unbiased
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 612
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #69 on: March 31, 2016, 01:23:47 AM »

Disgusting, possibly the worse non-racist/sexist thing he's said. 

No it is not, being pro the mass murder of babies is about the worst thing a person can be. Pro-choice = pro mass murder.
Logged
Beezer
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,902


Political Matrix
E: 1.61, S: -2.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #70 on: March 31, 2016, 02:57:43 AM »

Am I the only one who doesn't get the hoopla about this at all? If you think abortions should be illegal it is only logical that those engaged in such illegal activities are subject to some form of punishment.
Logged
Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin
Runeghost
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,366


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #71 on: March 31, 2016, 03:06:12 AM »

He's reversing course on it now:
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-statement-regarding-abortion
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I guess he figured out he put his foot in it with the pro-life crowd with that answer. I'd say his campaign internals showed it was massively damaging, but I don't think he has internals, does he?

The real question is if he'll now totally deny ever having given his original answer.

(And how much cognitive whiplash Trump supporters can handle.)
Logged
SUSAN CRUSHBONE
evergreen
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,735
Antarctica


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #72 on: March 31, 2016, 03:44:32 AM »

Disgusting, possibly the worse non-racist/sexist thing he's said. 

No it is not, being pro the mass murder of babies is about the worst thing a person can be. Pro-choice = pro mass murder.

no it is not, beďng pro your posts is about the worst thing a person can be. pro-unbiased = pro mass murder of brain cells.
Logged
Why
Unbiased
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 612
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #73 on: March 31, 2016, 04:31:51 AM »

Disgusting, possibly the worse non-racist/sexist thing he's said. 

No it is not, being pro the mass murder of babies is about the worst thing a person can be. Pro-choice = pro mass murder.

no it is not, beďng pro your posts is about the worst thing a person can be. pro-unbiased = pro mass murder of brain cells.

Yes it is, being for abortion = being for the killing of babies = being for mass murder. Any one for abortion cannot be against ISIS bombings or gun massacres or any killings without being a hypocrite.
Logged
SUSAN CRUSHBONE
evergreen
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,735
Antarctica


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #74 on: March 31, 2016, 04:37:48 AM »

Disgusting, possibly the worse non-racist/sexist thing he's said. 

No it is not, being pro the mass murder of babies is about the worst thing a person can be. Pro-choice = pro mass murder.

no it is not, beďng pro your posts is about the worst thing a person can be. pro-unbiased = pro mass murder of brain cells.

Yes it is, being for abortion = being for the killing of babies = being for mass murder. Any one for abortion cannot be against ISIS bombings or gun massacres or any killings without being a hypocrite.

thanks for proving my point Smiley
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.062 seconds with 14 queries.