No Abortion even for Rape

[Henrin]

No forced child support hmm. Do you prefer more welfare or more hungry children?

Isn't it kind of strange to say I want his money, but at the same time say I don't want him to ever see his child?

 

[AGENT J]

1.)Life is more important.
2.) Why? Because her life is danger and like is with any other case if we don't act we lose both of them.
3.) He is deemed safe until he shows himself to be a danger to the child.
4.) As for the last line, I disagree. Like it is with the rest of the equation no one can force someone to be in their lives,
5.) but if all parties are willing they all have the right to each other.
6.) I also do not agree with giving him her address.
7.) I'm against forced child support, so that wouldn't matter to me.
8.) Well, he might not be a danger to the mother, or he might be, but I'm willing to take steps for her safety if that is what she wants.

1.) except hers
2.) you didnt answer the question at all.

in one case the rapist alone is responsible for her death and forced all the issues along with law
in current and normal pregnancy there is no force

3.) wow so a felony rapist is defaulted save and forced back into his victims lives, sound totally logical
4.) you are free to disagree but you are factually wrong
5.) if ALL Parties agree YES im ok with it, you want it forced though
6.) why not? its is kids address? i thought he had a right to his kid? what if theres an emergency or accident?
7.) awesome so after the women is raped, and then forced to risk her life against her what ever money it costs her for the child to bare the child and raise it for the last 6+ years **** her, to bad thats not the rapists problem. Thats classy.
8.) that doesnt answer the question, if he is deemed not a danger to the child but he might be a danger to the mother do you thnk he should still get to see the kid?

 

[AGENT J]

Isn't it kind of strange to say I want his money, but at the same time say I don't want him to ever see his child?

of course not, she was FORCED to bare the child why should she be forced to take on all finical responsibilities its weird you let the criminal off the hook

 

[Henrin]

1.) except hers

What do you mean except hers??

2.) you didnt answer the question at all.

Your question was why, correct?

in one case the rapist alone is responsible for her death and forced all the issues along with law
in current and normal pregnancy there is no force

Why would that change my answer towards the life of the two parties?

3.) wow so a felony rapist is defaulted save and forced back into his victims lives, sound totally logical

No, I said deemed safe for the child, and I said nothing about forcing the man back into her life.

4.) you are free to disagree but you are factually wrong

No, I'm not. You even agreed with my reason.

5.) if ALL Parties agree YES im ok with it, you want it forced though

No, I don't. The relationship is between the child and the father. She is not involved in the arrangement.

6.) why not? its is kids address? i thought he had a right to his kid? what if theres an emergency or accident?

That would be forcing the father into her life. The address of the mother must not be given out.

7.) awesome so after the women is raped, and then forced to risk her life against her what ever money it costs her for the child to bare the child and raise it for the last 6+ years **** her, to bad thats not the rapists problem. Thats classy.

I'm always against forced child support. If however he wants to support the child, I would recommend he is allowed to do so.

8.) that doesnt answer the question, if he is deemed not a danger to the child but he might be a danger to the mother do you thnk he should still get to see the kid?

Yes.

 

[captainawesome]

Isn't it kind of strange to say I want his money, but at the same time say I don't want him to ever see his child?

Not if he raped her to get her pregnant.


Also do you prefer more welfare or hungry children?

 

[Henrin]

Not if he raped her to get her pregnant.

What about the cases where the man didn't rape the mother, doesn't have visitation and still has to pay? I just think its strange to say someone doesn't have a right towards their child, but they are financial liable for that child. I just don't get it.

 

[Henrin]

Also do you prefer more welfare or hungry children?

I prefer less children killed by their mothers.

 

[Bonzai]

What about the cases where the man didn't rape the mother, doesn't have visitation and still has to pay? I just think its strange overall to say someone doesn't have a right towards their child, but they are financial liable for that child. It's just kind of weird.

It's called "Real men aren't ruled by just their dicks"......................

 

[Henrin]

It's called "Real men aren't ruled by just their dicks"......................

What does that have to with legality?

 

[captainawesome]

What about the cases where the man didn't rape the mother, doesn't have visitation and still has to pay? I just think its strange overall to say someone doesn't have a right towards their child, but they are financial liable for that child. It's just kind of weird.

Good fathers should have visitation.

Rapists not really.

So if child support isn't mandatary what is your preference welfare or hungry children?

 

[AGENT J]

1.)What do you mean except hers??
2.)Your question was why, correct? Why would that change my answer towards the life of the two parties?
3.) No, I said deemed safe for the child, and I said nothing about forcing the man back into her life.
4.) No, I'm not. You even agreed with my reason.
5.)No, I don't. The relationship is between the child and the father. She is not involved in the arrangement.
6.)That would be forcing the father into her life. The address of the mother must not be given out.
7.) I'm always against forced child support. If however he wants to support the child, I would recommend he is allowed to do so.
8.)Yes.

1.) you dont care about hers you value the ZEFs more
2.) my question was why, as to why do you view it the same as a normal pregnancy when it is factually not, it makes no intelligible sense at all
3.) pretty tough to see the kid without being in the mothers life, im guessin g you have no kids therefor dont understand how silly this is
4.) yes you are factually wrong, the child has no rights to their parents
everyday children are denied thier parents per law and their opinions many times are meaningless, you are factually wrong
5.) again basically impossible unless the mom dies or gives up her rights, theres factually no way to exclude her
6.) how does the kid get back and forth?
school functions?
sports functions?
birthday parties?
holidays?
medical facilities or emergencies?
again its obvious you dont have kids
7.) like i said, your feelings are **** the woman, to bad she had to be forced to bar the child and support it for 6+ years

so NOW that the man is given rights to his kid does he have to pay child support now? or you against that, does that count as always?

8.) wow so you think its possible for him to not be a danger to the child but be a danger to the mother and he should be able to see his kid, yep again thats totally logical

a felony rapist that cant be trusted around a woman is perfect safe to be around a kid, thats brilliant lol

 

[AGENT J]

I had a feeling you were going to say something like that.

thats cause it makes logical sense

 

[Bonzai]

What does that have to with legality?

It has to do with avoiding situations which entail unwanted legal obligations, like boffing someone who isn't your wife and is so stupid she allows herself to become pregnant because she thinks she can ensnare you legally......................

 

[Henrin]

1.) you dont care about hers you value the ZEFs more

When did I say I don't care about her "life"?

2.) my question was why, as to why do you view it the same as a normal pregnancy when it is factually not, it makes no intelligible sense at all

Because the pregnancy itself is the same and of course the two parties are the same??

3.) pretty tough to see the kid without being in the mothers life, im guessin g you have no kids therefor dont understand how silly this is

It depends on how you handle the situation, but it has been done before.

4.) yes you are factually wrong, the child has no rights to their parents

You agreed with me. I'm not sure what else to say other than that.

everyday children are denied thier parents per law and their opinions many times are meaningless, you are factually wrong

I'm not talking about that.

5.) again basically impossible unless the mom dies or gives up her rights, theres factually no way to exclude her

Why is that again?

6.) how does the kid get back and forth?
school functions?
sports functions?
birthday parties?
holidays?
medical facilities or emergencies?
again its obvious you dont have kids

Visitation can be handled in many different ways to limit interaction between the parents.

7.) like i said, your feelings are **** the woman, to bad she had to be forced to bar the child and support it for 6+ years

so NOW that the man is given rights to his kid does he have to pay child support now? or you against that, does that count as always?

Always against forced child support. I believe I said as much already.

8.) wow so you think its possible for him to not be a danger to the child but be a danger to the mother and he should be able to see his kid, yep again thats totally logical

a felony rapist that cant be trusted around a woman is perfect safe to be around a kid, thats brilliant lol

When did he become a child molester? Did I miss a felony? When did he do anything towards children or that child? When did he even show he will rape his own children?

 

[Henrin]

It has to do with avoiding situations which entail unwanted legal obligations, like boffing someone who isn't your wife and is so stupid she allows herself to become pregnant because she thinks she can ensnare you legally......................

So if men weren't ruled by their dicks then forced child support wouldn't be a problem? I guess that makes sense in some situations.

 

[AGENT J]

1.)When did I say I don't care about her "life"?
2.)Because the pregnancy itself is the same and of course the two parties are the same??
3.) It depends on how you handle the situation, but it has been done before.
4.)You agreed with me. I'm not sure what else to say other than that.
5.)I'm not talking about that.
6.)Why is that again?
7.) Visitation can be handled in many different ways to limit interaction between the parents.
8.)Always against forced child support. I believe I said as much already.
9.)When did he become a child molester?
10.)Did I miss a felony?
11.) When did he do anything towards children or that child?
12.) When did he even show he will rape his own children?

1.) you views factually make that clear
2.) no its factually not, in one case it was forced and the woman had not choice, factually different
3.) no it doesnt, again you obviously dont have kids, to do it you would be forced to not involve yourself with your kid in many ways
4.) nope sorry i didnt you are factually wrong, kids to not have the right to thier parents this fact has been proven already and wont change
5.) why because it proves they dont have a right to their parents
6.) facts and reality the mother would simply be forced not to participate in many aspects of her kids life
7.) yes FORCE of one or the other not being in the ids life in many ways
sooo how do you handle it, you said they have a right to their kid, visitation restrictions would deny that
8.) yep and thats pathetic especially in this situation, you feel the rapist has a right to the kid but the woman should be screwed with all finical responsibility, again thats classy
9.) who mentioned child molester? nobody fail
10.) rape is a felony in many cases
11.) who said he did, some how you think a person that is a threat to a innocent woman is a good role model for a kid and no danger to that child

i mean what a great role model, cant be around a certain woman but hey let him be around a kid, again makes perfect logical sense

12.) who said he would? there you go again making stuff up

 

[Bonzai]

So if men weren't ruled by their dicks then forced child support wouldn't be a problem? I guess that makes sense in some situations.

I guess I'm saying that men need to watch out for themselves a lot more......................

 

[Henrin]

1.) you views factually make that clear

You haven't actually shown that I'm not in favor of protecting her life.

2.) no its factually not, in one case it was forced and the woman had not choice, factually different

That has nothing to do with the pregnancy itself.

3.) no it doesnt, again you obviously dont have kids, to do it you would be forced to not involve yourself with your kid in many ways

That is a different argument than the one you were using. Yes, he would be doing certain things for the child, but since we were talking about the mans involvement in her life I will consider this a goal post change.

4.) nope sorry i didnt you are factually wrong, kids to not have the right to thier parents this fact has been proven already and wont change

Again, you agreed with me. I have no reason to further talking to you about it.

5.) why because it proves they dont have a right to their parents

It doesn't prove anything other than the law is acting in a certain way.

6.) facts and reality the mother would simply be forced not to participate in many aspects of her kids life

Again, that is a different argument.

7.) yes FORCE of one or the other not being in the ids life in many ways
sooo how do you handle it, you said they have a right to their kid, visitation restrictions would deny that

I'm not sure why you consider this actually the same argument you were using before. We were not talking about limiting her access to her own child, but keeping him out of her life. These two arguments are not the same.

8.) yep and thats pathetic especially in this situation, you feel the rapist has a right to the kid but the woman should be screwed with all finical responsibility, again thats classy

If you have a problem with my position here than you have a problem with my position in general.

9.) who mentioned child molester? nobody fail
10.) rape is a felony in many cases
11.) who said he did, some how you think a person that is a threat to a innocent woman is a good role model for a kid and no danger to that child

i mean what a great role model, cant be around a certain woman but hey let him be around a kid, again makes perfect logical sense

12.) who said he would? there you go again making stuff up

How else is he danger to the kid? He was never found to be a danger to children and never was found guilty of anything involving children, so how is danger to children? Yes, he is pile of **** and a horrible role model, but that doesn't make him a danger to children.

 

[LadyMoonlight]

Personally I would keep the baby and raise it. Having an abortion is never going to cure the fact i had been raped. I would eventually learn to live with it as awful as it would be, but there's many hurdles people overcome to survive horrible things happening to them and still live a productive life. I would suffer more mental anguish knowing that i had taken the life of my unborn child. I just couldn't do it.

I also don't buy the argument that the baby will remind you of the rape. Like if she wasn't pregnant and had aborted the unborn child then she would just forget about it.......

Understand and accept others see it differently. You do what is right for you and i'll do what is right for me.

I didn't think anyone thought the way I do, but you do. I agree with your response because I would do exactly the same thing. Even if I opted for adoption after the child was born, I could never, ever forgive myself if I murdered a pre-born baby. A rapist destroys an innocent life. If I were to destroy the life of an innocent pre-born baby, then I would consider myself to be doing exactly the same thing and I would be no better than him.
People tend to forget, and I know I am going to get tip-truck loads of flack for saying this but it happens to be true. In Islam, the wife/wives are property and, according to Islamic teaching (and no, I don't have the quote at my fingertips), the husband has a Mohammad/God given right to have sex with his wife/wives whenever he wants to and the wife cannot refuse to submit unless, to my knowledge, she is ill or menstrating. While it is probably not considered rape in Islamic society, it would be in ours and as far as I am concerned, there is no doubt in my mind that it is rape, cultural differences aside. Ergo, thousands and thousands of Muslim women are raped every day...I imagine that they live with it because they understand that it is just the way it is and they have no choice. When their husbands want them for sex, they get what they want, whenever and wherever they want. These women have children that they love and care for. They don't get rid of them....they may dislike/hate the husband they could have been forced to marry, but they love the children they have, and they have to live with their "rapist" every day of their lives. One solution for a rapist in a Muslim country, is to marry the girl/woman he raped and it happens regularly. It is most likely only in Western nations that a woman would think of killing a child from such an event.

My heart goes out to women who are raped and find that they are pregant. It must be the most soul-destroying decision a woman can make in such a situation (I am less forgiving in a non-rape situation but have no intentions of arguing the matter here). I only know what I would do and I would never kill a pre-born baby and I would hope other women would find the strength within them to give life to an innocent and then adopt the baby out to someone who would love and care for the child.

 

[Henrin]

Btw, I never actually said anything about banning abortion in this case.. I realize that is the reason behind the question, but I was answering the question on a different basis.

 

[AGENT J]

1.)You haven't actually shown that I'm not in favor of protecting her life.
2.) That has nothing to do with the pregnancy itself.
3.)That is a different argument than the one you were using.
4.) Yes, he would be doing certain things for the child, but since we were talking about the mans involvement in her life I will consider this a goal post change.
5.) Again, you agreed with me. I have no reason to further talking to you about it.
6.) It doesn't prove anything other than the law is acting in a certain way.
7.) Again, that is a different argument.
8.)I'm not sure why you consider this actually the same argument you were using before. We were not talking about limiting her access to her own child, but keeping him out of her life. These two arguments are not the same.
9.)If you have a problem with my position here than you have a problem with my position in general.
10.) How else is he danger to the kid? He was never found to be a danger to children and never was found guilty of anything involving children, so how is danger to children? Yes, he is pile of **** and a horrible role model, but that doesn't make him a danger to children.

1.) uhm i didnt have to, your views factually do that
2.) actually in fact of course it does especially in the context of the discussion which is the pregnancy killing her
many legal cases similar in nature would find the rapist guilty of murder
3.) sorry its not, the rapist would be forced to be in the womans life or the woman would be forced out of her kids life. same argument
4.) of course because it proves you wrong and you dont like it, bottom line the man would be forced into her life or she would be forced out of the kids life
5.) nope keep posting this lie if you like it will never be true, you are factually wrong as already proven
6.) correct which means the kids do not have the legal right, thanks for admitting you are factually wrong
7.) no its not the rapist would be forced into her life unless shis forced out of the childs, dishonesty about this reality wont make it go away
8.) because reality make them that way, there will be force trying to act like they are different wont work to anybody honest
9.) no "problem" just identifying it as what it does, it screws the woman, which you dont care about
10.) how one even makes this statement and thinks it makes sense is beyond me but it specks volumes of how your broken logic works

 

[Muhammed]

anyway for the people that dont even support abortion for rape expalin why please, i want to know YOUR LOGIC and YOUR OPINION on it, mine dont matter.

The baby committed no crime, therefore killing the baby is a violation of his/her right to life.

 

[AGENT J]

The baby committed no crime, therefore killing the baby is a violation of his/her right to life.

thanks for your answer and opinion to the first part
my response is it has no legal right to life
if we are talking human rights banning abortion and forcing pregnancy and carring to term also violates human rights

now what about the other parts?

For example the woman is raped and now she will be forced to carry the ZEF to term. Even if there is risk to her life and the risk isnt 60% or more.
What happens if she does die cause of the pregnancy, would you support murder charges?


next example is, ok she lives, now she is responsible for the product of rape for 18 years if she doesnt give the baby up for adoption. Im sure the kid will trigger zero memories/reminders of the rape, especially if the kid looks nothign like her and looks just like the rapist

WHen the dad "FELONY RAPIST" gets out and he has served his time and paid his dues after probably 6 years does he get parental rights? I mean his times has been served, he paid his dues.
if yes, are you saying the first thing the rapist gets to have is the address of the woman he raped 6 years ago? im sure that makes her feel great!
if he gets custody is he allowed to come to the house to pick up and drop off his kid?
in many states they dont do anything about child support if a parent is in jail so what about the first 6 years of the kids life he just gets off scott free


theres sooooooooooo many questions, and mind you, im sure there are probably people out there that think the father forfeits his rights so some of my questions are moot but it woulds just lead me to having others.

anyway for the people that dont even support abortion for rape expalin why please, i want to know YOUR LOGIC and YOUR OPINION on it, mine dont matter.

 

[joko104]

Personally I would keep the baby and raise it. Having an abortion is never going to cure the fact i had been raped. I would eventually learn to live with it as awful as it would be, but there's many hurdles people overcome to survive horrible things happening to them and still live a productive life. I would suffer more mental anguish knowing that i had taken the life of my unborn child. I just couldn't do it.

I also don't buy the argument that the baby will remind you of the rape. Like if she wasn't pregnant and had aborted the unborn child then she would just forget about it.......

Understand and accept others see it differently. You do what is right for you and i'll do what is right for me.

Talk and living by platitudes is easy when there is no reality to it. Sexual assault rages from date rape to extremely violent and harmful stranger assault, which can leave a woman disfigures and in serious medical crisis - and life and plans all shattered maybe permanently. I do not think you can really know what you'd actually do.

 

[joko104]

Forcing a woman to have a child by rape extends an assault which may have only lasted minutes and did no enduring or serious physical harm - and multiplies it times 100,000 into an ever increasing physical and psychological assault, assault on her entire life, and in ways that cause increasing suffering and pain - and increasing risk to permanent health damage and even death.

In my strong opinion, any person who would force a woman to have a rapist's baby against her will by force - including force of law - is 1000 times more evil, more criminal, more sadistic, more violent and is committing 100,000 times more of a physical and psychological assault on the girl or woman than the rapist did - literally physically and psychologically increasing torturing and harming the girl or woman to force their religious/ideological beliefs upon her.

It would be less violent and less brutal and less harmful for such ProLifers" to chain the girl to a post and bullwhip her while demanding she profess your religion/beliefs and promising to live her life as your God/beliefs dictate or you will continue bullwhipping day and night.