Capital punishment keeps that criminal from ever killing again.

The person who should be put on trial is the abortionist, along with anyone who used coercion on the mother in any way. Most mothers are NOT voluntarily choosing to have an abortion, and most of them are being lied to about what it is and does.

In order to get a conviction in a capital murder case, you have to prove:

1. scienter - the mother has to know she is carrying a formed baby (with all the deception out there, few do, and they can’t exactly look for themselves)

2. mens rea - the intent to kill her own child. If she is being coerced, she lacks that intent.

Abortionists have both. They commit medical rape on women, and axe-murder on children, knowing full well what they are doing, and do it freely. Prosecute, convict and execute a few of them, and there will be no more abortion. It makes no sense to execute a woman who was deceived and coerced. That’s no better than stoning a woman for being a rape victim.

True feminists support a woman’s right to refuse. Most women ARE being deceived or coerced, or both. It almost happened to me, and I am totally opposed to abortion, and far more knowledgeable than most women.

You have to do it right though. The trial must be fair and speedy (most being done within a week) based upon two or more pieces of evidence. And the execution must be sure (everyone convicted of murder is executed), swift (the execution must occur swiftly), painful (it has to be painful enough that the experience deters anyone thinking of murdering their baby from doing so) and public (as much of the public as possible in the local area is to see the execution take place).

Currently, the USA does it completely backwards in every way. That’s why the so-called death penalty that is given to a small few capital criminals is ineffective at deterring those crimes from occuring.

Not knowing the just punishment for murdering a baby is not something to be proud of.

That so many don’t know what justice is is a fact that should make you concerned. Not something you should praise God for.

Softspade,

When I wrote this post, I wondered whether I should bother pointing this out. I decided to do so because the target audience in Libertyville that day — as with all our Face the Truth Tour displays — was the general public, not specifically women seeking abortions.

Generally speaking, we recommend against pro-lifers displaying large graphic abortion signs — such as we display at Face the Truth Tours — outside abortion clinics, as such signs can serve as a physical barrier between a woman intending to enter a clinic to have an abortion and any pro-life sidewalk counselors who are there to talk to the woman and warn her about the physical and emotional harms that abortion poses to the woman herself.

As for the corner I’ve allegedly forced myself into, several pro-lifers who are much smarter than I am have recently responded to Quindlen’s column.

The most succinct remarks, methinks, were offered by the ever cogent Frederica Mathewes-Green:

“The goal of abortion laws is to stop abortion. And the person to stop is not the woman, who may have only one abortion in her life, but the doctor who thinks it a good idea to sit on a stool all day aborting babies.”

And, just this morning, the Silent No More Awareness Campaign issued its response.

Well said!

Why? The so-called “Pro-choicers” would never allow it. Because even if a woman is coerced or lied to, abortion is still the sacred sacrament of choice. Other choices, like choosing not to work outside the home, or choosing to bear a child when finances are tight, or choosing not to use birth control, are ridiculed, but the right to have a forced abortion is sacrosanct. Why else would “pro-choicers” protest cutting off funding to “family planning” programs in China?

I think that every child ought to have a right to be an unplanned gift of God.

What you never respond to in this post is the charge that Quindlen was actually making. The main thrust of her argument, which you, and some of the commenters, have amply reinforced here, (excepting, Quinn, Lauren, and Twix) is that many anti-abortionists consider the pregnant woman to be a mere pawn in the game. Are you against punishing the woman because she is not competent to make a decision? The fact is, in order to have an abortion a woman must actively make a choice and then undergo a stressful medical procedure. There are certainly some cases where a woman might be pressured to have an abortion, but any doctor who might be tempted to perform one under such circumstances does not deserve the title. (And will probably lose it too, along with a term in jail.)

The non-competence of women is certainly a very interesting road to peer down, because the question then becomes: under what circumstances is a woman competent to face the consequences of her actions? You’ve stated clearly that killing an unborn child is not for which something a woman should be held accountable. Why should she be put in jail for any number of lesser offenses? A woman who kills her toddler (or five, cf Andrea Yates) is surely in a very vulnerable state of mind, the same goes for a woman who steals cars or computers or clothespins.

The corner you’ve forced youself into, Mr. Jansen, is that now you’re arguing that woman are idiots. (Why else wouldn’t they be liable for what you think is murder?) I, for one, know plenty of women who would disagree with that.

If a man hires someone to MURDER his wife, he goes to prison.

If a woman hires someone to MURDER her husband, she goes to prison.

If a woman hirese someone to MURDER her unborn child, she goes to prison.

End of Story.

Well said, Dave!

Lauren said: “Most anti-choicers would send a woman to jail.”

Then surely, Lauren, you wouldn’t mind providing us a list — complete with proper documentation, of course — of names of anti-choicers pro-lifers who have publicly stated their desire to send women who have abortions to jail?

As I watched the video, I struggled with how I would answer the question. At first I felt kind of stupid because I had no answer. I’m an aerospace engineer (rocket scientist) and I do like to think through all the ramifications of decisions.

The more I thought about this, however, the more I realized the power of their lack of a ready answer. Those beautiful people he interviewed were focused on Life, not on punishment (they remind me of our Lord Jesus). They want to save babies, punishment wasn’t even on their priority list. What a marvelous, graceful, Christ-like testimony that lack of an answer is!

Perhaps some day Mr. Goodwin will be able to see that.

God bless you for what you’re doing.

One of the more popular pro-abortion canards is that pro-lifers want to send women to jail. This is addressed by Eric and John at Generation Life:
The answer is that the abortionists would be penalized for performing illegal abortions. This is what t…..

NFP vs. Contraception…

http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2007/07/nfp_vs_contrace.html

Mike

I want to see all those who played a part in knowingly murdering that baby brought to trial and charged with murder. Upon conviction the guilty would be surely, swiftly, painfully and publicly executed the very next day as God demands.

Prison is inherently unjust and was never given as an “optional punishment” by God. All the nations around Israel had prisons, so it wasn’t as if God was unaware of imprisonment as a form of punishment. And despite what many Catholic priests claim (I’ve only heard priests make this claim) Israel did in fact have the resources to build prisons and put criminals in there.

Anyone who claims that God presently wants injustice instead of justice is anathema. Those who love God and their neighbor want to see justice brought about in their area. Especially when it comes to serious capital crimes such as murder, kidnapping, rape and adultery.

Every person asked in that video should have given the answer that human life begins at conception and those who murder a baby are to be brought to trial for murder and upon conviction surely, swiftly, painfully and publicly executed as God commands.

Genesis 9:6 “Whoever sheds man’s blood, By man his blood shall be shed; FOR IN THE IMAGE OF GOD HE MADE MAN.

Exodus 20:13 YOU SHALL NOT MURDER

Exodus 21:12 He who strikes a man so that he dies shall surely be put to death.

Numbers 35:33 ‘So you shall not pollute the land where you [are;] for blood defiles the land, and no atonement can be made for the land, for the blood that is shed on it, except by the blood of him who shed it.

Ezekiel 13:19 “And will you profane Me among My people…
killing people who should not die,
and keeping people alive who should not live…?”

Matthew 5:17-18 Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 “For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.

Galatians 3:24-25 Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.

1 Timothy 1:8-11 But we know that the law [is] good if one uses it lawfully, 9 knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for [the] lawless and insubordinate, for [the] ungodly and for sinners, for [the] unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10 for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine, 11 according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God which was committed to my trust.