Does Cruz want death penalty to all women who have abortions, no exception (???)

[Blue3]

The purpose of making something illegal is to punish the person initiating the crime. Punishing women for abortion is the logical outcome of the "ban abortion" movement. Trump is right on that.

Cruz seems to honestly believe "Abortion is Murder" , and in no exceptions to abortion. Cruz is also the more religious fundamentalist (with some theocratic tendencies), and much more pro-life than Trump. Cruz also believes in the Death Penalty.

So, logically (based on his other statements), it seems to me that Cruz supports the Death Penalty for all women who have abortions. They are either legal persons who are being murdered, or they aren't legal persons and therefore aren't being murdered. Murder doesn't become less than murder dependent on the murder victim's age. If it's murder, then it's murder. Cruz advocates the death penalty for murder. This is the logical outcome of the "ban abortion, a zygote/embryo/fetus is a person, abortion is murder" movement.

If you don't think this is what penalty he wants for abortion, why, and how does it logically fit with the rest of his position on abortion and capital punishment?

[Young Conservative]

He didn't say that. This is all conjecture.

[dax00]

He didn't say that. This is all conjecture.

[Blue3]

I didn't say he said that. That's why I put in the title.

But I'm saying, based on his other positions, this is the logical outcome.

This is a discussion about whether people agree this is the logical outcome of his positions or not.


All of this is there in the OP.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

I think he (and ~90% of pro-lifers in general) would count the abortion doctor as the murderer, not the mother.

[Blue3]

I think he (and ~90% of pro-lifers in general) would count the abortion doctor as the murderer, not the mother.

Doesn't make sense to me. The abortion doctor is the tool. And sometimes the woman commits abortion through medication now.

But even if that is the case... then that's still legal charges of conspiracy to murder, accomplice to murder, etc. Which would also be the death penalty, or life imprisonment.

[Xing]

Well, thanks for reminding me why Republicans are doing so terribly with female voters.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

Here's my stock answer for this and other weird ideologies and interpretations of ideologies of presidential candidates:

Even if true, it would never, NEVER, pass Congress.

[yankeesfan]

He didn't say that. This is all conjecture.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I clicked on this thread all excited to see that Cruz had actually said something like this and was thus DOA in the general election (and possibly the primaries too). Screw you.

[i4indyguy]

He didn't say that. This is all conjecture.

This

[Blue3]

The space for a thread title isn't long enough to put:
"If you think Trump is bad, Cruz is even more fanatical on abortion, and the logical outcome of his positions is that all women who have abortions should get the death penalty with no exceptions."

So I put what the logical outcome of Cruz's positions is, and put (?-?-?) in the thread title to show it's a discussion, and no quotes to show it's not a direct statement.


Keep it focused on the topic.

[Seriously?]

The purpose of making something illegal is to punish the person initiating the crime. Punishing women for abortion is the logical outcome of the "ban abortion" movement. Trump is right on that.

Cruz seems to honestly believe "Abortion is Murder" , and in no exceptions to abortion. Cruz is also the more religious fundamentalist (with some theocratic tendencies), and much more pro-life than Trump. Cruz also believes in the Death Penalty.

So, logically (based on his other statements), it seems to me that Cruz supports the Death Penalty for all women who have abortions. They are either legal persons who are being murdered, or they aren't legal persons and therefore aren't being murdered. Murder doesn't become less than murder dependent on the murder victim's age. If it's murder, then it's murder. Cruz advocates the death penalty for murder. This is the logical outcome of the "ban abortion, a zygote/embryo/fetus is a person, abortion is murder" movement.

If you don't think this is what penalty he wants for abortion, why, and how does it logically fit with the rest of his position on abortion and capital punishment?

I believe he said the opposite. That no criminal penalty should be given to women who get abortions if abortion was made illegal. He's getting some flack from the right on that position.

It's really a stupid "gotcha" question from the left. If Roe v. Wade were overturned (which it wouldn't be), any constitutionalist like Cruz would defer that question to the states, not the Federal government.

[°Leprechaun]

I didn't say he said that. That's why I put in the title.

But I'm saying, based on his other positions, this is the logical outcome.

This is a discussion about whether people agree this is the logical outcome of his positions or not.


All of this is there in the OP.

Your OP is logical. Obviously, though he doesn't actually support the death penalty for abortion. Would it not also be the same kind of logic that is used for actually illegally murdering abortion doctors?

[Blue3]

The purpose of making something illegal is to punish the person initiating the crime. Punishing women for abortion is the logical outcome of the "ban abortion" movement. Trump is right on that.

Cruz seems to honestly believe "Abortion is Murder" , and in no exceptions to abortion. Cruz is also the more religious fundamentalist (with some theocratic tendencies), and much more pro-life than Trump. Cruz also believes in the Death Penalty.

So, logically (based on his other statements), it seems to me that Cruz supports the Death Penalty for all women who have abortions. They are either legal persons who are being murdered, or they aren't legal persons and therefore aren't being murdered. Murder doesn't become less than murder dependent on the murder victim's age. If it's murder, then it's murder. Cruz advocates the death penalty for murder. This is the logical outcome of the "ban abortion, a zygote/embryo/fetus is a person, abortion is murder" movement.

If you don't think this is what penalty he wants for abortion, why, and how does it logically fit with the rest of his position on abortion and capital punishment?

I believe he said the opposite. That no criminal penalty should be given to women who get abortions if abortion was made illegal. He's getting some flack from the right on that position.

It's really a stupid "gotcha" question from the left. If Roe v. Wade were overturned (which it wouldn't be), any constitutionalist like Cruz would defer that question to the states, not the Federal government.

And what would the punishment be at the state level, if "abortion is murder"?

It can't be avoided by just giving the decision-making to a different level of government.

[Blue3]

A little old (from November), but:


Ted Cruz Hailed Activist Who Wants Abortion Providers Executed Eight Days Before Planned Parenthood Shooting - See more at: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/ted-cruz-hailed-activist-who-wants-abortion-providers-executed-eight-days-planned-parenthood#sthash.68iK6fAp.dpuf

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Cruz sent out a really great statement on this issue:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://www.tedcruz.org/news/cruz-donald-trump-hasnt-seriously-thought-issues/

[Seriously?]

The purpose of making something illegal is to punish the person initiating the crime. Punishing women for abortion is the logical outcome of the "ban abortion" movement. Trump is right on that.

Cruz seems to honestly believe "Abortion is Murder" , and in no exceptions to abortion. Cruz is also the more religious fundamentalist (with some theocratic tendencies), and much more pro-life than Trump. Cruz also believes in the Death Penalty.

So, logically (based on his other statements), it seems to me that Cruz supports the Death Penalty for all women who have abortions. They are either legal persons who are being murdered, or they aren't legal persons and therefore aren't being murdered. Murder doesn't become less than murder dependent on the murder victim's age. If it's murder, then it's murder. Cruz advocates the death penalty for murder. This is the logical outcome of the "ban abortion, a zygote/embryo/fetus is a person, abortion is murder" movement.

If you don't think this is what penalty he wants for abortion, why, and how does it logically fit with the rest of his position on abortion and capital punishment?

I believe he said the opposite. That no criminal penalty should be given to women who get abortions if abortion was made illegal. He's getting some flack from the right on that position.

It's really a stupid "gotcha" question from the left. If Roe v. Wade were overturned (which it wouldn't be), any constitutionalist like Cruz would defer that question to the states, not the Federal government.

And what would the punishment be at the state level, if "abortion is murder"?

It can't be avoided by just giving the decision-making to a different level of government.

The argument should go as follows: crimes are regulated on the state level at the will and the discretion of the citizens of the state through their legislature. The Feds should have no say as either who is criminalized and the length of the sentences. That should be left to the discretion of the laboratory of states as provided under our Constitution.

But again, the entire premise of that question is asinine as Roe v. Wade is going nowhere anytime soon.

[Why]

I think he (and ~90% of pro-lifers in general) would count the abortion doctor as the murderer, not the mother.

Both are, just like the person who hires the hitman and the hitman are both murderers.

[Why]

Cruz sent out a really great statement on this issue:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://www.tedcruz.org/news/cruz-donald-trump-hasnt-seriously-thought-issues/

That statement makes no sense.

[Wisconsin+17]

Uh, for one, many prolifers are Catholics and don't believe that the death penalty is the appropriate punishment for anyone.

Two, women are dying from abortion today - due to sepsis and other infections acquired from their purportedly 'safe' abortion. Much of that has to do with the fact that abortion doctors do not have admitting requirements at a local hospital and dump their patients off without the proper continuity of care. Then you get into the fact that abortion doctors themselves have opposed proper regulations  that would require them to operate as surgical clinics. They would rather gamble with their patients. Some don't even have a current medical license.

Three, who's hands are actually on the suction vacuum machine? Technically a woman would be an accessory and not the one actually committing the murder. Ergo, treating two things that are legally different makes no sense.

Four, there's the argument that it is better to secure valid testimony against abortion doctors, so there would be precedent for prosecutors to actually protect these women. That is how it worked before Roe, fwiw. -

Five, if at any point the abortion doctor lied and told the woman that her child wasn't alive and wasn't a person, then we couldn't hold the woman responsible.

[Why]

Uh, for one, many prolifers are Catholics and don't believe that the death penalty is the appropriate punishment for anyone.

Two, women are dying from abortion today - due to sepsis and other infections acquired from their purportedly 'safe' abortion. Much of that has to do with the fact that abortion doctors do not have admitting requirements at a local hospital and dump their patients off without the proper continuity of care. Then you get into the fact that abortion doctors themselves have opposed proper regulations  that would require them to operate as surgical clinics. They would rather gamble with their patients. Some don't even have a current medical license.

Three, who's hands are actually on the suction vacuum machine? Technically a woman would be an accessory and not the one actually committing the murder. Ergo, treating two things that are legally different makes no sense.

Four, there's the argument that it is better to secure valid testimony against abortion doctors, so there would be precedent for prosecutors to actually protect these women. That is how it worked before Roe, fwiw. -

Five, if at any point the abortion doctor lied and told the woman that her child wasn't alive and wasn't a person, then we couldn't hold the woman responsible.

The women requests a death, even if death occurs, or, is pretended to have happened, in another way, the women still wanted a death, made plans for a death and conspired with others for a death. The women is still guilty for her actions even if they did not lead to the death.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And what precisely *are* her actions if the abortion doctor lies to her and tells her that her child isn't alive, and isn't a person?

All she's done is walk into a clinic and sat on a bed. What actionable thing could she be charged with if she's been lied to about the nature of her decision?

[Simfan34]

The real question is: does he want to behead them?

[Blue3]

Uh, for one, many prolifers are Catholics and don't believe that the death penalty is the appropriate punishment for anyone.

Two, women are dying from abortion today - due to sepsis and other infections acquired from their purportedly 'safe' abortion. Much of that has to do with the fact that abortion doctors do not have admitting requirements at a local hospital and dump their patients off without the proper continuity of care. Then you get into the fact that abortion doctors themselves have opposed proper regulations  that would require them to operate as surgical clinics. They would rather gamble with their patients. Some don't even have a current medical license.

Three, who's hands are actually on the suction vacuum machine? Technically a woman would be an accessory and not the one actually committing the murder. Ergo, treating two things that are legally different makes no sense.

Four, there's the argument that it is better to secure valid testimony against abortion doctors, so there would be precedent for prosecutors to actually protect these women. That is how it worked before Roe, fwiw. -

Five, if at any point the abortion doctor lied and told the woman that her child wasn't alive and wasn't a person, then we couldn't hold the woman responsible.

1. This is about Cruz, and others like him who do support the death penalty.

2. They should probably have more government funds to be better then.

3. Uh, no. And many women self-medicate. Also, this could logically lead to turning a miscarriage into a criminal investigation, to see if it was intentional or not.

4. What??

5. You're not even making sense anymore.