I think most of you are missing the point of the OPs argument. He's not asking if you think embryos and fetuses are living humans, he's asking if punishing acts of abortion is justifiable SUPPOSING the anti-abortion position about embryos and fetuses is correct.

You, sir, are exactly what this thread is looking for! 

You don't like abortion.  Is that just your personal choice, or do you want to make it illegal for everyone?  If doing an abortion is against the law, why should we not punish people who break the law?  More broadly, why should anything be against the law that there is no punishment for doing anyway (breaking the law)? 

(P.S.  I actually agree with you about the viability argument for when it is/isn't okay to abort.  I believe it's about how mentally developed the fetus is.  If science advances to make a 400-celled blastocyst "viable", that doesn't make it a person to me.  For you, it is a person and the fact that it isn't viable with today's science doesn't make it not a person.  I agree with that logic.) 

Of course they should be punished.

Even today abortions are illegal. Not completely illegal, but to abort a fetus that is 35 weeks old sure is illegal and is such a cruel act that it should be severely punished.

Can anyone imagine being interviewed by Chris Matthews? He never finishes his questions. Or if he does, he adds his blurbs in while you are answering or thinking. He sucks!

Husband? How quaint...and naive.

Heh, I've never thought about that. But yeah, it only makes sense that the mother gets punished.

Yep I consider it a human but I'd get an abortion if I felt I needed to.

Trump has the right idea, but then makes a conclusion so bad it seems like he gets it off of "illuminati confirmed memes".

Are abortions great? No. In fact, I actually encourage them to be the last thing possible. Also, the earlier the better.

While abortions shouldn't be given to anyone if they just say ''i want an abortion", we shouldn't be punishing them. I mean, goddamn it! Either people want abortions completely gone or available right on the spot. A wait of a day(or several) should be the minimum to make sure the woman will not go back on her word and sue the doctors who completed the operation.

...

"Boy, these conservatives are really something, aren’t they? They’re all in favor of the unborn. They will do anything for the unborn. But once you’re born, you’re on your own. Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to nine months. After that, they don’t want to know about you. They don’t want to hear from you. No nothing. No neonatal care, no day care, no head start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no nothing. If you’re pre-born, you’re fine; if you’re preschool, you’re fucked.

Conservatives don’t give a shit about you until you reach “military age”. Then they think you are just fine. Just what they’ve been looking for. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. Pro-life… pro-life… These people aren’t pro-life, they’re killing doctors! What kind of pro-life is that? What, they’ll do anything they can to save a fetus but if it grows up to be a doctor they just might have to kill it? They’re not pro-life. You know what they are? They’re anti-woman. Simple as it gets, anti-woman. They don’t like them. They don’t like women.They believe a woman’s primary role is to function as a brood mare for the state." ~George Carlin

I am pro-life and I believe that life starts at conception.  Saying that life starts after birth is a completely arbitrary line in the sand and we are merely judging whether somebody is a human being based on his/her location.  Even when we say that life starts at a certain IQ or level of productivity, how do we judge what intelligence level merits the right to be called a human being? What if a mother wants the choice to end the life of her 2 year old toddler?  This child is clearly nowhere near as smart or productive as a 20 year old and so should an abortion be allowed in this case?  In fact, we have had at least 1 case in Canada where infanticide has been justified in court because it is seen to be similar to a very late term abortion. 

The only point where a distinctive change occurs in the nature of the fetus is at conception.  Any other line we draw is purely arbitrary, but it doesn't make it OK.  Time and time again, in the past, societies have tried to justify killing innocent people because they have deemed those people to be less than human and, thus, sidestepped the ugly label of "killing."  One such example was, back in the colonial days, when citizens would trade in native scalps of men, women and even children for reward money: native people were considered at the time to be savages and so this activity wasn't seen as murder.  It was a convenient line in the sand for society to draw in the 18th century when we were fighting wars with tribes but I think everybody would agree that murdering innocent aboriginal people under this pretense was just as wrong in the 18th century as it is now.  One day our society will see abortion in the same way: some things are just wrong and it doesn't really matter how good society tries to make us feel about it.  Killing is killing.

ummm, that's a common misconception, death sentence is depended on the State, not the country, as far as I know, 33 states still have it, and the rest do not. I also doubt Donald Trump will get elected, I'm personally leaning towards Sanders, I'd rather not vote for Clinton but if she wins the democrate election then I guess I don't have a choice but to vote for her, but Trump is kind of an asshole to the point where even pro-life people don't like him ATM.

Interesting thing about the death sentence though, if Hitler was arrested in the US in modern day, death sentence or not? -_^ But that's another topic for another day.