標籤：

墮胎權漫談（一）懲罰醫生還是懲罰孕婦

01-24

本文作者林垚。本文於2016年5月22日首發於會員通訊。

相關閱讀會員通訊：墮胎權漫談—未完結的完結篇

今年墮胎權之爭最重頭的戲碼，無疑是最高法院六月份即將宣判的關於德克薩斯州反墮胎法的 Whole Woman』s Health v. Hellerstedt 一案。不過在萬眾矚目翹首以待這一判決的同時，還有許多大大小小的鬥爭在上演。5 月 20 日，俄克拉荷馬州的共和黨州長 Mary Fallin 否決了州議會剛剛通過的一項反墮胎法。根據該法案的規定，如果施行墮胎手術並非拯救孕婦生命的絕對必要手段，則施行該手術的醫生將會被判處重罪（felony），面臨三年有期徒刑並吊銷行醫執照。

Fallin 並不是墮胎權的支持者。恰恰相反，她是一位堅定的反墮胎權派：

In 2008, as a member of Congress, she co-sponsored a bill to treat fetuses as people and give them equal protection under the U.S. Constitution. Since she became governor in 2011, she has signed legislation to ban many second trimester abortions, requirelonger waiting periods, and restrict access to medication abortion — laws that were later found to be unconstitutional.

她否決這個法案，只是因為法案的關鍵條款實在太過粗糙含混。根據自己前幾次簽署的法案被判違憲的教訓，Fallin 知道這次的法案同樣毫無在法庭上通過考驗的希望，只會因為打官司白白消耗州里的預算，而俄克拉荷馬目前恰恰深陷預算危機之中：

Sources familiar with the governor"s thinking told CNN that the decision to veto the bill 「weighed heavily」 on the anti-abortion rights governor, but that the 「hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees」 faced by the state from a near-certain Constitutional challenge to the bill eventually led to her veto.

Oklahoma is currently facing a budget crisis, something that spokesperson Michael McNutt told CNN the governor"s office was focusing on instead of the growing buzz over the governor"s chances to be on the ticket in November.

當然，掌握州議會的共和黨並不會善罷甘休，已有議員揚言要推翻州長的否決。

由俄克拉荷馬法案將施行墮胎手術的醫生定為重罪，不難聯想到前段時間特朗普在墮胎問題上的「失言」。3 月 30 日，特朗普在接受採訪時聲稱，應該對接受墮胎手術的孕婦施加「某種形式的懲罰（some form of punishment）」。結果這番表態不但激起了墮胎權支持者的反彈，而且連（當時尚未退選的）克魯茲和凱西克這兩位持極端反墮胎權立場的對手（克魯茲認為即使那些遭到強姦而懷孕的女性也無權墮胎、凱西克在州長任內簽署了一系列極其苛刻的反墮胎法案）都跳出來譴責：

Ohio Gov. John Kasich told MSNBC, 「Of course, women shouldn"t be punished for having an abortion.」

And Texas Sen. Ted Cruz said Trump"s comment 「demonstrated that he hasn"t seriously thought through the issues, and he"ll say anything just to get attention.」

「On the important issue of the sanctity of life, what"s far too often neglected is that being pro-life is not simply about the unborn child; it"s also about the mother – and creating a culture that respects her and embraces life,」 Cruz said. 「Of course we shouldn"t be talking about punishing women; we should affirm their dignity and the incredible gift they have to bring life into the world.」

於是幾小時後，特朗普又收回了之前的表態，宣稱該受懲罰的絕不是孕婦本人，而是施行墮胎手術的醫生（也就是俄克拉荷馬法案的立場）。

有些人懷疑特朗普之所以會在這個問題上「失言」，是因為他並不真心反墮胎權，也不了解反墮胎權派的具體主張，才會以為表態越強硬越能討好保守派。梳理特朗普過去在墮胎問題上的立場，這確實是一種可能。1989 年特朗普因為設宴招待「全國墮胎權行動聯盟（National Abortion Rights Action League, NARAL）」主席 Robin Chandler Duke 而遭到反墮胎權分子的威脅；1999 年特朗普在電視採訪中宣稱：

「I』m very pro-choice,」 Trump says. 「I hate the concept of abortion. I hate it. I hate everything it stands for. I cringe when I listen to people debating the subject. But you still — I just believe in choice.」

Russert clarifies his original point: Would you ban partial-birth abortion? 「No,」 Trump replies.

一直到 2011 年特朗普考慮參選總統時，才在保守派政治行動會議（Conservative Political Action Conference）上宣稱，自己已經成為一名反墮胎權主義者。不過那一次，特朗普的參選野心被奧巴馬在白宮晚宴上的一頓調侃打垮，蟄伏了整整四年，才捲土重來、正式參選。

特朗普在反墮胎權上的相對新晉，可能確實導致他不太熟悉保守派的話語策略。但真要追究起來，其實他不熟悉的，也僅僅是「話語策略」而已（請參考 5 月 10 日會員通訊《共和黨建制派為何對特朗普的出格言論無可奈何》）。正如一篇分析文章指出的，「懲罰墮胎孕婦、而不僅僅是懲罰墮胎醫生」的做法，保守派早就悄悄付諸實踐了，而克魯茲、凱西克這些自命「關愛女性」的反墮胎權派對此卻從來不置一詞：

In Indiana last year, Purvi Patel was sentenced to 20 years in prison for what the prosecutor charged was an illegal self-abortion. In Tennessee, Anna Yocca was charged with attempted murder for trying to end her pregnancy with a coat hanger. In Pennsylvania,Jennifer Whalen went to jail for giving her daughter abortion pills. Have our kinder, gentler abortion opponents spoken up for any of these women?

Perhaps Mr. Trump 「misspoke,」 as he described it, because he』s a relatively recent convert to the cause, unfamiliar with the doublespeak in which forcing women to give birth is a form of love, and punishment is the last thing on the anti-abortion movement』s mind. In his blundering way, he revealed the true logic of the case against legal abortion: If it』s murder, then murder has consequences. Too bad the moment of clarity couldn』t last.

反墮胎權派之所以要用「關愛女性」來自我粉飾，顧忌的無非是女性選票，結果導致了立場上的自相矛盾、左支右絀。當然，一個「吾道一以貫之」的反墮胎權主義者，完全可以斥這種為了選票而拋棄原則的做法為怯懦，堅持認為：既然胎兒是人，那麼墮胎就是殺人；既然墮胎是殺人，那麼不管墮胎的醫生還是孕婦，都應當受到相應的法律懲罰。對於這種一以貫之的反墮胎權主義，墮胎權的支持者應該怎樣回應呢？且聽下回分解。

註：《選·美》會員通訊系作者觀點，並不代表《選·美》播客立場

參考鏈接

  • scotusblog.com/case-fil

  • cnn.com/2016/05/20/poli

  • webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us

  • congress.gov/bill/110th

  • nytimes.com/2015/04/14/

  • lifenews.com/2015/05/07

  • reproductiverights.org/

  • articles.latimes.com/20

  • wtnh.com/2016/05/20/vet

  • nytimes.com/2014/11/05/

  • tulsaworld.com/news/gov

  • msnbc.com/rachel-maddow

  • politico.com/story/2016

  • cnn.com/2016/03/30/poli

  • washingtonpost.com/news

  • theatlantic.com/politic

  • zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/20

  • nbcnews.com/news/asian-

  • washingtonpost.com/news

  • nytimes.com/2014/09/22/

《選·美》通信關注美國政治，是為付費會員提供的美國政治資訊。

入會請訪問 xuanmei.us/member(可點擊「閱讀原文」) 查看《選·美》會員計劃，幫助我們把《選·美》做得更好。

推薦閱讀：

TAG:选·美Podcast | 美国政治 |