By virtue of experience, I know that a majority of people who just read that title will now desperately want to punch me in the crotch and yell, “Shut up!” Though I’ve been trying to be more concise in my articles, I think this one is going to take a little longer for me to explain myself fully. If I cut this one short, I think people will have a warped understanding of my views on this matter. All I ask is that you give me a fair hearing and lend me your ears for a few minutes as I make my case. If you will hear me out, I feel confident that you will want to crush my gonads a little less by the time I finish than you do at this present moment.

This past week, I found myself in a bizarre situation. For the first time, I defended a policy position of Donald Trump while the rest of the world railed against him. When Trump was asked if he would support punishment for women who had abortions if the procedure was made illegal, Trump replied, “There has to be some form of punishment.” This immediately set off a firestorm of condemnations from pro-abortion groups and pro-life groups who skewered Trump for his comments.

Staying true to form, the straight-talking, politically incorrect Donnie reversed himself a few hours later when he realized potential supporters were upset with him seemingly leaving me as the only person in the United States to hold this view, but I have to say that even after reading the arguments of Trump’s critics, I still don’t understand why pro-lifers condemn him.

Let’s talk about abortion real quick. There are only two options. Either an unborn human is a person or an unborn human is not a person. There is no middle ground on this issue. Pick a side.

If you believe an unborn human isn’t a person, then of course there should be no punishment for women who have abortions. If a fetal human is no different than a cancerous lump or a failing kidney, then a woman should be able to do whatever she chooses with that unborn human. If the mother and doctor agree that it would be fun to start slicing apart the fetal human one toe at a time, slowing working up the legs cutting off an inch or two with every slice, then switching to the same procedure on the fingers, hands and arms and eventually beheading the torso, that’s their business, and if the woman further decides to keep the head, take it to a taxidermist, hollow out the innards and have the head stuffed and mounted to hang above her desk, that’s also perfectly okay. Though someone might find this eccentric, nobody who believes that the fetal human is merely a clump of irrelevant cells should be remotely bothered by any of this because it’s just a hunk of unnecessary flesh. It’s not like anybody died, so who cares? No punishment is necessary.

However if you believe an unborn human is a person, then it logically follows that the fetal human has human rights and deserves legal protection. It must be illegal to poison and/or dismember an unborn child just like it is illegal to poison and/or dismember a child that has left the womb. It also follows that anyone who would kill an unborn child must be murderer and must suffer negative consequences.

Here is where we get the giant disconnect. For the pro-abortion crowd, I disagree with you strongly, but at least you guys are being mentally consistent as long as you say a mother should be able to do anything to the unborn human without consequence, but for whatever reason, a large portion of conservatives say, “Killing an unborn child is murderer, but the mother who chooses to kill the child is an innocent victim.” No, pro-lifers. This makes no sense. You have failed. Please try again.

The pro-life crowd is united in declaring that abortion doctors must be brought to justice, but many pro-lifers somehow think that a woman who chooses to have an abortion bears no responsibility. This is the exact same line of thinking that argues a hitman deserves prosecution but the person who hired the hitman is an innocent victim. I find that to be nonsense. They both chose to end a human life, and they both deserve to share the blame. To argue otherwise is to make the sexist assumption that pregnant women cannot make decisions for themselves and are simply too stupid to be morally responsible for their actions.

Obviously, abortion is legal and nobody is suggesting women or doctors should be prosecuted for activity that is currently allowed, but in a theoretical society which has recognized that the unborn child is a person, why is it so radical to suggest that a woman who kills her child should be prosecuted for a crime? What other law in society can be broken without consequence? Nobody would ever propose such a law!

I’ve looked into the reasons many pro-lifers are against punishment for women who have abortions, and they’ve offered some ideas worth exploring.

Some have pointed out that women who abort only do so because they are desperate and cannot find ways to support themselves, and yet no conservative would accept this as an excuse for thievery, a much less serious crime than murder. Why should this same argument work for abortion?

Some point out that abortion mills like Planned Parenthood lie to women and push them towards bad decisions, but remember this scenario presumes that abortion has been made illegal, and in all other cases where someone is urged to commit a crime by people who have lied about the nature of the crime, the individual still bears the responsibility for wrong actions.

Some have argued that the guilt women often feel upon having an abortion is punishment enough, but though it’s true that many regret their actions, it’s equally true that many do not, and since when have guilty feelings ever excused murder?

Some have suggested that a desire for punishment can only be motivated by a desire for vengeance, but this wrongly assume that punishment equals vengeance. Good parents always try to make sure there are negative consequences to their children’s misbehavior out of a desire of justice, deterrence and personal growth; punishment should have nothing to do with spite and vengeance. If we can understand this in parenting and in most areas of the justice system, why do so many assume vindictive motives in this case?

Some say that abortion doctors are the root of the problem and that women should be given a free pass if they turn evidence agains abortion doctors, but the doctors greater guilt doesn’t excuse the mother’s role, and it’s not hard to imagine ways to catch abortion doctors without the mother’s testimony.

Many have pointed to the ambiguous status of the unborn child as a reason for leniency. Since the life of the unborn would presumably still be an issue of some debate, mercy should be extended. I actually agree, but mercy should be extended in the form of a lighter sentence rather than no sentence at all.

Finally, some argue that we risk alienating women to the pro-life cause if we suggest that women should bear some responsibility for their choice to murder the unborn. They say that if we can save more lives by allowing amnesty for murderers, then the rescue of innocents outweighs the lack of justice. This perspective is worth considering, but I wonder are we really convincing more people when we will not admit to the logical conclusion that if abortion is murderer then those who have abortions are murderers? Aren’t we watering down our argument and showing critics that we don’t really mean what we say? The pro-life movement has been taking the light touch approach ever since Roe V. Wade, and has the pro-life cause been prevailing? Polls show the approval for abortion today is about the same as it was forty years ago, and even if it does save more lives, aren’t we still embracing a dangerous ends justify the means mentality if we agree to ignore the crime of murder to save lives? I’m willing to consider it, but where is the evidence that this strategy even works?

I’m not claiming I have all the answers here, but this is what makes sense to me. If we get to a point in society where the law is changed to say abortion is illegal, then we must have negative consequences for those who break the law just as we do with every other law. To do otherwise is madness. I’m not saying that women who have abortions should necessarily be thrown in prison. It seems to me that we should give juries a wide latitude between some light fines and a few years in jail. The jury can look at the specific circumstances of each case and make a fair judgment. I can understand some of the concerns of the pro-life crowd that opposes sentences for women who have abortions, and I think much of this is motivated by compassion for the women who have gone through this procedure, and I share the concern for those who have taken an innocent life without truly understanding what they were doing, but we cannot let our desire for mercy negate our desire for justice, and I don’t see how it makes any sense to say that women who murder their children should receive nothing more than a firm scolding. (For more from the author of “Of Course Women Should Be Punished for Having an Abortion” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.