The Great Debates About Life: Abortion and Capital Punishment
- By Simple Politiks
- 6 August, 2012
- 47 Comments
Two identical outcomes for two completely different reasons with completely different justifications. One is justified because it is believed that life does not yet exist, and the other because it is believed the victim has lost his/her right to life. Interestingly enough, the stereotypical trend of these positions usually goes like this:
Republicans: Pro-Life and Pro Death Penalty
Democrats: Pro-Choice and Anti Death Penalty
Very interesting indeed…
Both of these issues are incredibly sensitive, perhaps the most emotionally charged realm of politics, and I respect both sides. Each position certainly brings persuasive arguments to the table… But here is what I have to say about it.
Whenever we deal with a debate which involves some form of life, I believe we immediately enter the domain of philosophy. Granted, philosophy is intertwined with almost all of government/politics, but these debates usually bring out the purest form of philosophy when compared to other topics in politics. Questions like “When does life begin?” and “Who decides who lives and who dies?” are always the philosophical centerpieces. Which means these questions will never be completely answered; there will never be a universal acceptance for one decision. The debate will rage on for decades, centuries, all of mankind. Everybody has a different idea of right vs. wrong, making the resolution of this issue virtually impossible. With the topic of life and philosophy in mind, let’s continue.
I’ll start with my general opinion on life: I think it is precious. Do I believe a killer is precious? No, I abhor who he/she is and what they have done, but in my opinion one’s life is indeed precious; as in nobody should be able to take that away from him or her. Many people use the Bible or another religious doctrine as justification, which is great – I just don’t think religious texts are always right… Instead, I prefer to operate on the Constitution and what feels right in my heart and my head:
Abortion? I’m morally against practically every abortion.
Even victims of rape, who I feel an overwhelming amount of compassion for. I would personally expect those children (who are extreme rarities, the outliers of outliers) to be put up for adoption because of the trauma the rape victim may experience. And if that were the case, I would understand completely. But at least that child would be able to live, which is what the abortion debate comes down to for me. The only exception to my view on abortion is when the mother is in extreme danger due to her pregnancy. If the unborn child may take the mother’s life then it will be an extremely difficult, but I have no qualms with allowing operations to abort the unborn child in order to protect the mother. There is no sense is losing two lives when one can be protected. This is the only situation in which I believe it is morally just for mankind to decide who lives and who dies.
Naturally, birth control and condoms and other forms of contraception should be used by everyone who has sex and does not want to have a child. But contraception does not give one the privilege to be irresponsible. One should always act responsibly when it comes to sex and be fully aware of the potential consequences, no matter how small the percentages may be. They may be 99% effective, but there is always that 1%. Have people draw from 100 straws and someone is bound to get the short one eventually, aren’t they?
Some people will say that life doesn’t begin at conception, but I don’t agree. I may agree that whatever is in the womb at the time of conception isn’t exactly a human, per se… But it is indeed alive, and it will indeed become a human if it survives the natural processes that are a part of childbirth. And that’s good enough for me. You can’t say that about any other cell in your body, can you?
Capital Punishment? I’m morally against killing people.
I could have said “I’m morally against killing people” for abortion as well, but I wanted to be specific. In my mind you cannot justify taking a life from a person based solely on his/her actions in this world. They may be the scum of all scum, but who are you to say “Let’s kill him”?. It also falls under “Cruel and unusual punishment” for me, but I don’t even need an Amendment to help me find an answer to this topic. The Amendment argument obviously does not hold solid ground in this debate, or we would not have capital punishment to begin with.
I believe capital punishment is even more emotional than abortion because of the deep seeded hatred and love which are usually present in the situation. A murderer, much like Holmes who attacked Aurora Theater in Colorado recently, will take the lives of somebody’s loved one(s). Now that somebody must deal with the incredible pain of an untimely end, as well as the absolute rage/resentment projected towards the criminal. When your world gets shattered and you know who threw the rock, you instinctively want to throw one back at all costs. But life isn’t up for debate, in my opinion. Not even the worst of crimes should give you that kind of power, as unjust and painful as that may feel.
So there you have it. I kept it simple and to the point. What are your views? How do you feel about mine? Questions?
Leave a comment and I’ll try to get back to you. Thanks for reading!
Copyright © 2013 
I have don’t really have disagreements with you. Abortion is still kind of iffy to me, but for the most part, I agree with your reasoning. The only problem I see with adoption is that there aren’t too many people who are willing to adopt, and those orphan children will only multiply. Either way, I don’t agree with taking anyone’s life, whether fully human or not. Great post. Thank you for bringing this to the table.
Also, I never realized how paradoxical republican and democrat views are on life. Thanks!
Actually, there are a lot of people willing to adopt babies. That’s why international adoptions have become so prevalent. People want babies. The biggest adoption problem is with older children who are usually in the system because of abuse (including neglect) and abandonment. These children come with a lot of problems that new parents aren’t ready or willing or able to handle.
ok, well then, that’s all the better. Ever since I was 12, I told myself that I would adopt two kids one day. At first, I thought about newborns or babies or toddlers. But as i have gotten older, I’ve been contemplating on adopting an older child. I don’t know if I’ll ever have my own children, but I would love to adopt at least one child.
The reason a lot of people do not want to adopt American babies is that many of them are born to parents who are drug or alcohol addicts and some even are born with that drug in them. In many cases these children require extra care and do not behave like children without these problems.
Thank you for this forum to write my views on abortion and capital punishment: they are as follows — I am against abortion for any reason, even when the mother’s life is in danger, and I am equally opposed to capital punishment. On euthanasia I am undecided.
First time caller. This is a very good post. I am not a fan of capital punishment, yet one of my reasons, is that issue of certainty you raise. Juries have been known to be “primed” to find guilt when evidence is scarce. I personally do not support abortion, but I tend to support a woman’s choice as it is her body, not mine. If I were asked by someone I know, I would share my opinions, but in the end, it is the woman’s decision in my mind. Like you, I am very much in favor of birth control use and would love to see more education in schools and churches around helpful information. People are going to have sex, so let’s help them be more responsible with their bodies. I volunteer to help a lot of homeless and impoverished families and large family size is highly correlated with poverty. Again, good post and I look forward to reading more.
Abortion: Let the woman decide.Forcing a rape victim to carry the outcome of the most despicable crime in her womb for 9 months is nothing less that torture.Capital Punishment: let those affected by the crime decide the sentence.Its easy to be philosophical when one is not at the receiving end of injustice.
Thanks for the contribution. We have differing views but that is to be expected with such intense topics.
Word!!
Hahaha my favorite comment yet
As horrible as rape is, a woman has no more right to kill a child simply because of its inconvenient and torturous location (her womb). The child is innocent of the crime. (You may be interested in reading “Startling Beauty” by Heather Gemmen. She was raped and ended up keeping her child.)
A woman who chooses abortion is not only making a decision about her body, but about someone else’s – her unborn child’s. Because the child cannot speak for him/herself, we have a duty to protect the child’s life. Taken out of an emotional context: say you have a house that a squatter is living in. You do not have the moral right to blow up the house with the person inside. Yes, it’s your property, bu the squatter is not your property. He/she is a human being with his/her own rights.
good to know your thoughts..I will read your recommendation…since I am not an expert in this field the following questions spring up in my mind:
who pays for the upbringing of the child?and I mean through college and beyond….the state? have you considered the psychological impact the child will have to deal with when he is informed of the circumstances that brought him into this world? a victimized unwilling mother and an authoritarian state.
I agree with you about your comments on abortion. There is always a lengthy wait list to adopt; so anyone saying there are no homes is incorrect. I’ve been on a wait list.
I don’t have a set opinion on capital punishment. There is some truth on both sides.
Good respectful post! ~ Wendy
Thank you very much!
Personally, I never understood how a person can be against murder of a fetus but be all for the murder of an already living being. To me a murder is a murder is a murder. Regardless of the crime one commits, we mortal beings have no right to judge the actions of others. People can revert back to any religious text they choose but I want for someone to show me the part where it says that man can carry out or pass a judgment that only God is supposed to make.
Definitely a very engaging blog. Thanks for sharing.
Powerful, debatable point you make here. One needs to give it much thought. Thanks for stirring the pot!
Thank you!
If the two issues were only as simple as you have described them. I do agree with both of your viewpoints on the fact that killing a human being is morally wrong, whether in the womb or in the electric chair. However, there is a bigger issue that has to with the secularization of society and loss of attachment to natural law that comes to us from our creator, and that issue and the issue of educating our population about how the powers that are in control, whether democrat or republican, are only after control and proving their point, rather that deferring to the one who really knows what is best for us. Thanks for posting this, and I enjoyed the interesting way that you generalized the two different political views on these issues.
Great post,
Jason
Great article! And I say that even though I don’t agree!
Abortion- every individual in that position must have a right to decide. Existing life has rights to determine how it shall live and having a child is something life changing. I’d rather see abortion clinics than foster homes. The problem you I think want to address, stems from society and hence to me the solution is a change in society’s thinking not about abortions but about sex and making it less casual as it has become. Once that is addressed abortions themselves will go down
Capital punishment- above I gave the reasoning of freedom to choose. Here I stick with the same principle. If someone has CHOSEN to take anothers life, then they have chosen to take their own. Capital punishment may not be a crime that can be justified by the action when looking at the culprit, the punishment has to be justified by what happened to the victim.
Thanks for following my blog!
Even though we have come to different conclusions I still think your arguments hold a lot of value, and I respect them! I can certainly understand your moral justification.
Following your blog was my pleasure, thanks for contributing to mine!
I agree with you my only issue is for preference on pro choice for abortions. Reasoning is choice which doesn’t mean to abort. I’m afraid when government limits our actions how long would it take before they tell us what we can and can’t do like Chinas restrictions on birth. There is a smal part about death penalty only because of the pedophiles. They do serious harm to 100′s before caught and only a narrow margin will change their ways but justice has so many errors and flaws to end anothers life causes me concerns.
On abortion: Yes, life may begin at the moment of conception, but they are definitely not sentient at this point. In order to feel pain, one needs to be sentient. I have no problem with the abortion of a fetus up until about 22 weeks since they do not feel any pain at that point. I don’t think it’s right to value a non sentient being’s “rights” over a sentient being. This was a good read, however!
Definitely understand where you’re coming from, thanks for sharing your opinion!
I’d also like to add that I agree with you on the importance of using contraception and the practice of responsible sex, and I’m 100% with you on your views of capital punishment. It’s crazy to me that people kill people to punish people for killing people.
I completely agree with Eachgold. I also think this because I frimly believe the woman is the one who should decide.
Of course, she MUST do it responsably. I wouldn’t like a girl saying she’s gonna abort because she didn’t want to use anti-conceptive methods with his boyfriend, though I wouldn’t force her to give birh (a traumathic experience for the woman both in a physical and a mental way). So the discussion about abortion should also bring everyone to discuss about a true sexual education.
About capital death, I’m definetly against it. First, cause I don’t think it’s moral. Second, cause I find it contradictory with what a punishment should be there for.
That’s it, great post as always.
Interesting post! I think the argument for and against the death penalty is more straightforward than the one re abortion. I am against the death penalty as I cannot see how it helps anyone. On the other hand, as a mother I can see that the issue depends on so many factors which are so personal and I really don’t think it is for me to tell another woman what to do with her body.
Both topics are very difficult to answer, that’s for sure. Thanks for stopping by and thank you for the compliment!
Thanks for following my blog!
I have to say, I am the complete opposite of both your views. I am Pro-Choice. A woman has the right to do what she feels necessary with her own body. Who are we to tell her what she can do with her body? Aborting fertilized eggs is not killing a human life in my opinion. They are just cells. As for rape victims, they psychological damage of rape is destructive enough, but to then be forced to carry the baby of the rapist? There are far reaching repercussions regarding this. We have so many children in orphanages or swinging through foster homes. Why would you want to put a child, product of rape or not, through something like that. I challenge people who believe children should be adopted instead of aborted to adopt all these children then.
As for capital punishment: I used to be against it until I did a paper on it several years ago. My research completely changed my mind. I am 100% for capital punishment. There are cases where people who should’ve been put to death but then worked the system and got out, only to kill again. I will try to find one for you. When a person consciously decides, plans, and takes the life of another person or people, why should they not be executed? They are a danger to society. Life in prison is not the answer. Killers that are serving life sentences have taken the lives of other inmates who have a chance of getting out because they have nothing more to lose. So by allowing prisoners to continue living, you are signing the death warrant for someone else. If a dog were to maul a person and kill them, they would be put down immediately because they are a danger. So why not execute a murderer?
I agree with you completely on both accounts. People who are actually guilty of those crimes that we (as a society) have determined to be punishable by death, exist at great cost to that society. They have already maimed or killed other people (who were probably productive citizens) and it is incredibly expensive to house inmates.
Yet I still have a hard time justifying the death penalty in the US, because of how faulty and skewed our justice system currently is. Many innocent men and women have been needlessly put to death (or incarcerated). There is no easy solution unlike with abortion. Women need to be able to make that private choice without someone else’s morality legislating theirs. It’s that simple.
I dont agree with either of your views, but accept that everyone is entitled to their own opinion. We dont have capital punishment in Australia, but I think eventually it will come back. Criminals will leave society no other choice. Im also pro-choice for abortion. I dont like females who keep having them because they arent responsible, I imagine that for most women, it is a difficult decision to go through with and would prefer not to be in the position where they have to make that decision in the first place, but for different reasons they have to.. It must be very traumatic for some. I also think it is freedom of choice. I wonder if you have an article on euthanasia on your blog. Great blog., Kat
I haven’t written a post about euthanasia so far, I have only been around for just under a month, but there will be one soon! I can promise you that.
Thanks for contributing! I appreciate it
I applaud your courage in even rising the topic. This is one we would have to agree to disagree on, since I’m pro-choice and pro-capital punishment. In both cases, I’m 50.1% vs 49.9%, because both sides have good points of view. What tipped the balance for me is a sense of perspective that includes that 350,000+ new souls are born each day, and 150,000+ souls depart each day. I cannot grant the individual human life primacy in that context; I just can’t.
Like you, I see a fetus as not human, but as something that may become human in time. (I joke, but with an element of seriousness, that humanity doesn’t truly begun until you can communicate.) And, most critically, I grant the woman choice in this matter. As a male, I can’t fully appreciate all the factors involved, so I must rely to some extent on what women tell me, and the strong consensus among those I know and trust is pro-choice. Which is not to say casual-choice. It’s a tough call, a very tough call, and one I’ve had a role in making (to this day, it saddens me, but it was the right choice).
As for CP, ultimately for me it’s just a matter of taking out the garbage. I believe some are beyond humanity, that they’ve surrendered their humanity (I do not believe in “inalienable” rights). But, I would not execute Holmes; he is clearly a very sick man. He might be healed, but he must be taken care of. I’m talking about clear, blatant, repeat offenders. People who’ve made it clear they have no good role in society. When such people are clearly dangerous, especially murderous, then it just seems the smartest thing we can do is remove them from the equation.
I definitely appreciate your input! Thanks for such a thorough analysis of the sides that I did not cover in my post. Comments like yours always encourage people to question why they believe in something and if they are actually happy with their reasoning.
Hope to see more from you in the future! Good luck with your blog.
Thanks! You certainly do raise some interesting and worthwhile topics, and I’ve been looking for better sources of political info, so you’re likely stuck with me dropping by!
But what if you know most definitely who threw the proverbial rock? A sex offender with clear, physical evidence to secure a guilty verdict in some (if not all) cases qualifies for execution, IMO. Why? Primarily because this individual is highly unlikely to be rehabilitated and presents a serious danger to members of society, impacting who they will become and setting the victims up to perhaps become victimizers themselves eventually. This is homegrown evil if ever there was any. But so far as circumstantial evidence goes, I’m less inclined to recommend capital punishment as an option, because the possibility exists that the judge and jury may have been wrong, and the taking of innocent life troubles my soul.
With that said, I disagree with you about abortion, and I’ll briefly share why. First of all, banning abortion, thereby forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy to full-term, is an unenforceable law. In trying to do so much pain will arise in our society, this I can promise. Men may struggle with understanding why some women feel as they do about pregnancy, but ultimately the bodily decision resides with womankind. Agree or not, that’s fine. But when a person is called to use their body to incubate another’s life, regardless of how conception occurred, only a willing mother can be trusted to treat her fetus with respect. And if the potential child is abused within the womb, what fairness is that to him or her? While being placed up for adoption sounds well and fine to those of us who’ve never experienced such a life event, it appears to have a profound impact on those adopted out. I’m much more in favor of children being brought into the world by parents who want and love them, who promise to provide for their care, demonstrating our actual concern and appreciation for quality of life. Because how much value is life with no quality, life immediately rejected and cast away, life coming up abused and bewildered?
My support goes to the life-affirming stance; the blogger seems to prefer quantity over quality in this instance. Or perhaps his fixation is on embracing absolutism, believing there can be no grey area to take into consideration.
Please allow me to elaborate now that I’ve caught up (somewhat) on sleep. In terms of capital punishment, several concerns spring to mind. One being allowing our government the right to kill its citizens — it’s a concern, especially as we now see this form of punishment disproportionately handed down to black and Hispanic males (I do have links for this data and can make available if anyone is interested). If capital punishment is used in a discriminatory manner based on one’s race, I have a problem.
Secondly, there’s the matter of sufficient evidence to warrant the death penalty, which is another problem our criminal justice system has dropped the ball on. As a contributing member of The Innocence Project, I’m seriously troubled by how many men are wrongly accused (too often based on eyewitness testimony in the era before DNA evidence could be thoroughly analyzed) and how incredibly difficult it is for them to be exonerated (requiring us on the outside to foot the bill to collect and compare available DNA, since for whatever reason the justice system doesn’t feel accountable in that regard). A good documentary on this subject is “After Innocence.” If the evidence isn’t air-tight or the perpetrator wasn’t caught by law enforcement in the act (admissions of guilt satisfy me to the extent that they can be corroborated with physical evidence, such as leading LE to the bodies, etc.), I tend toward a different form of punishment than death.
Now, with all that said, in my thinking capital punishment differs from other forms of “punishment” in that it isn’t intended merely to punish the offender; the wider aim is to protect society from someone who cannot or will not control deadly impulses that jeopardize the peace in the lives of individuals, families, and whole communities.
When we consider this only in terms of retribution I can understand why people feel capital punishment is extreme and a poor reflection on our liberal sensibilities, but to me it’s not about getting even, or placating the victims, or killing someone simply because they killed. In fact, I wouldn’t recommend the death penalty for all or even most murderers, since many of them do show success at being rehabilitated. It’s those who cannot, who have proven so psychologically damaged and damaging, that have convinced me that society cannot co-exist with them. They simply won’t allow the rest of us to live unmolested in their midst, so we remove these select few from the tribe permanently. It’s not a pleasant decision and not one to be celebrated, but I personally have come to believe it is necessary. Ted Bundy remains a prime example of someone completely deserving to be put down. And by “put down,” yes, I do mean as if we were dealing with a dangerous, rabid dog running the streets. That the person (or the dog for that matter) is incapable of controlling their behaviors is the major argument why this treatment is suitable, taken in light of the magnitude of their crimes committed. We may feel sympathy and pity, as we probably should, but there does come a point where lines get drawn and highly-destructive persons forfeit their own rights and, in some cases, their lives.
“…capital punishment [...]; the wider aim is to protect society from someone who cannot or will not control deadly impulses that jeopardize the peace…”
Yes, that’s exactly how I see it. It’s been shown to not be a deterrent, which isn’t surprising considering the pathology behind the psychopaths involved. It is a matter of social protection.
The Oliver Stone movie, Natural Born Killers, draws a clear connection between Mickey & Mallory and scorpions, which are a creature most of us would kill on sight (or, if gentle-hearted remove to as far a distance as possible). You can’t rehabilitate scorpions; they are what they are.
The movie also cites the American Indian tale of the woman who heals an injured poisonous snake. Once healed, upon releasing the snake, it turns and bites her. As she dies she asks the snake why it did that after she healed it. The snake replies, “I’m a snake; it’s my nature.”
An excellent counterargument to the anti death penalty belief! Even if I don’t necessarily agree with you on a fundamental level, this comment makes you think and question your own beliefs. Exactly what should happen when people form opinions on political issues. Thanks so much for the contribution.
While I believe this should be an intellectual personal decision, not having ever been faced with either decision I just can’t be sure if my intellectual decision would change if met with the experience of an unwanted pregnancy or violent crime …
Precisely why there will never be a universally accepted position with this issue. It hits people where it matters most =\
Wow! A lot of good stuff here and a lot of off-the-wall stuff as well. The reconciliation of taking life in these two scenarios is a simple one but over complicated by one’s own personal agenda which is many times nothing more than one’s emotions.
One death sentence is of the innocent and one is of the guilty. It is just that simple. Of course this simplicity is clouded by personal agendas and a value system that is subjective.
Any good attorney can take an argument to its illogical extreme and create enough confusion that the truth is lost. These are smoke screens. This is what is being done with this topic.
Anyone wishing to justify his actions (abortion) can make a good case, whether that is justifying promiscuity or eliminating an inconvenience in one’s life. Or one can let a murderer go free just because it does not feel right or feel good or because it is taking the “higher moral road.” Any excuse that excuses one from responsibility.
That argument is self-serving BS; the higher moral road is the more difficult road and is seldom the one taken. It is like disciplining a child. No one likes doing it, but unless you are going to raise a self-indulgent, hellion, he must be corrected.
Likewise, a methodical, calculating, disciplined and sufficient set of legal remedies is necessary in order to maintain social order.
Now, if one argues that we do not now execute all murderers, and I am not saying we should, and yet we don’t have social disorder, then my response would be, “Get off the internet and go out into the street and look around.” You have not been paying attention over the last seventy years. Maybe you are not seventy years old, but you can read can’t you?
This controversial question, however, is only a symptom of a bigger issue, like all of our problems are a symptom of a bigger issue. We are a subjective species and practical atheists. We, or at least many of us, claim to believe in God, but we do little to find out what He is telling us and has told us. Instead, we adopt the ever changing “situational ethics,” an oxymoron for certain.
We don’t have to reinvent ethics; these questions, for the most part, have been resolved for us long ago. Of course embracing those answers means that we are not god, which is what we want to be.
There are two books in Jewish Scripture that are relevant to this topic. Joshua records a time of overcoming hardship, pestilence, poverty, and persecution. Judges records a darker time with mention of controversial verses about human sacrifice. Each book has a thesis statement at the end.
Joshua, “But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.
Judges, “And each man did that which was right in his own eyes”
One records bringing people up to a standard of absolutes, the other records lowering standards to the people.
Now tell me, is this not what we have today? Even in our educational system, have we not lowered standards? See another post on Simple Politiks about “math?”
Sorry that this is so long, but yes, Simple Politiks, you are right, this subject gets into the philosophical arena.
I’m curious on how you expect a rape victim who becomes pregnant to afford to have the child, though? Are there any programs out there for these women? Because it’s not cheap to have a child–you are eating for two, the woman may not have good healthcare or be able to afford to go to the doctor, the woman may lose her job or not be able to work (I had a friend who was fired because she was ordered to bed rest during her fifth month of pregnancy), and not to mention the huge hospital bills.
I’m just curious about the above questions because so many people say these women could just adopt them out, but who pays for all this stuff? It’s never discussed and I feel it should be. It’s easy to tell someone that they should carry the child anyway if they aren’t paying for it or having it themselves. If it’s up to the woman to pay for these things after she was raped, it doesn’t seem fair at all. Especially since she is already suffering so much emotionally and physically. It seems wrong to me for people to DEMAND that she go through with the pregnancy and possibly destroy her current life just to make others morally happy (people who will most likely NEVER give her a helping hand). Just my thoughts.
Not all victims of rape are poor or struggling, so a portion would be able to afford it. I don’t have the statistics at my fingertips so I can’t give any exact figures.
With that said, I’m sure a fairly large portion falls into the category which you described (I’m going to guess a slight majority). I completely agree that it should be discussed and that something should be done. My post does not reflect the current law, though. If I were to somehow gain the power to change the law and make abortions illegal, I wouldn’t leave the mother alone to fend for herself. Some type of program that would give monetary aid for a certain length of time, maybe a couple of years, would definitely be needed. That is, if she decided to raise the child.
However, this is assuming we have the money to spare. I think the costs would be in the millions, which isn’t too bad considering how much wasteful programs we have that are in the billions, so I’m sure there would be a way to find a place for such a program.
I don’t see abortions being criminalized in the near future, maybe at all. Even if I had the power to make an impact on the issue in Congress, I would not spend my time on it unless there were no pressing issues (which is extremely unlikely). There are far more pressing matters to be dealt with in our government right now. Attempting to make abortion illegal would only distract the nation from other problems that need to be addressed immediately. For example, our debt. Or our education. Or the poor.
Let’s do the math. Your post on Akin cites the 32,101, which agrees with other sources (I imagine they’re all quoting the same gynecology study from 1996). And let’s say the aid is for two years. Would $10,000 per year be an appropriate amount?
32,101 x 2 x $10,000 = $642,020,000
That’s the commitment per year, each year of said aid program. You can change the time span, or you can change the aid amount, and the result will change, obviously. Of course, not all women would require the aid, but there’s also the issue of victim remuneration, which might not be need-based.
Yeah that’s a rough estimate of what it would be. It would most likely be cut substantially from factors you referred to already, among others. Maybe cut that in half for a closer approximation for the people who would actually need it. Not having the money and raising the child are two requirements that would filter out a good portion of those 32,101 people.
I fear such a program would be manipulated… What I mean is I have a feeling the number of reported rapes would go up. Some people would lie about bearing a child because of rape, and that would be costly.
As I said earlier, I don’t foresee the need for such a plan to arise. I don’t think the decision on abortion will be overturned… And even if it is overturned for the general public, the chances of it being taken away from rape victims is even slimmer. Not even presidential nominees (Romney and McCain being the most recent two) supported anti abortion laws for rape victims. It’s safe to say that my incredibly vague and unorganized idea will never see the light of day
.
an interesting related article:
http://edition.cnn.com/2012/08/22/opinion/prewitt-rapist-visitation-rights/index.html?hpt=hp_c4