Rape Does Not Justify Abortion. Or... [W:593]

[Removable Mind]

What? I'm not saying a small child, but more along the lines of a teenager. What's wrong with that?

First of all a birth shouldn't take place against a woman's will...especially as a result of rape or incest. Second, even if a woman chose to give birth -why would the rapist's identity ever be made available except in a matter relating to the child's life depending on body parts from the rapist?

 

[iguanaman]

Being a rapist is not genetic.

Really? Prove it then.

 

[Cardinal]

As someone that has been there for rape victims I think I have some idea.

Which statement would have greater bearing on my political lean, Henrin? Is it ten years of posting history, or my claim that I'm a conservative because I went to a GOP meeting once?

 

[AGENT J]

Rape Does Not Justify Abortion

Don't you think that's too much already? Pro-lifers are using lame excuse ('One crime does not require another') in order to reshape social attitude towards rape victims and equate sexual violence to abortions. Rape is one of the worst crimes in terms of psychological damage and its continuance. In a situation like this woman is being abused two times. First, by the attacker himself. Second, by the society that tries to impose psychological pressure on her and make everyone belief she is doing something wrong.

1.)people are welcome to that opinion, luckily in a country like the USA we have rights and freedoms and others dont get to decide for everyone else.
2.) also there are many pro-lifers that are ok with abortion in the case of rape.

 

[Bodi]

You are, in effect, accusing an innocent child, who had no choice in the circumstances of his conception, of sexually-abusing his mother, of committing a crime comparable to the rape which she already endured; and on that basis, attempting to justify condemning that child to death.

Did you even think before you wrote that?

"An innocent child" talk is simply emotional hyperbole...

 

[JayDubya]

No, rape is multiple times worse than early abortion can ever be.

Bull****.

Rape victims recover. Homicide victims are dead. Multiple times worse? You think the victim that can recover has suffered the worst injury? Yeah, okay. Great logic there, chief.

anyone with actual objectivity would know that

Yeah, okay. I do think that when you kill someone you do more permanent and severe harm. No, there is nothing subjective in that assessment - objectively, that is more permanent and more severe harm.

 

[JayDubya]

Even that is scientifically wrong.

As usual, nothing in the post I wrote was "scientifically wrong."

The embryo resulting from rape contains the DNA of the rapist and is CLOSELY related to him.

So exactly as I said, "a completely different human being innocent of any wrongdoing your attacker perpetrated on you."

Only a real woman hater would want more rapists to be born

Ridiculous! Just absolute insanity. Yes, of course, rapist is an identified dominant genetic trait afterall, and rapists only ever breed more rapists... :roll:

You should never talk down to me (or anyone else) about science (or probably anything else) again after this exchange.

The hate is all on your end, friend.

 

[JayDubya]

You have ABSOLUTELY NO FRIGGEN CLUE what a rape victim recovering means! No clue!

Hrm. Does it involve being dead?

I'm guessing it doesn't.

So, I'm correct in my argument then? Yeah, I am. Okay.

Rape / sexual assault is horrible and can have severe, long-lasting mental or physical repercussions. It's awful and its perpetrators belong in prison for a long time.
Taking a human life in aggression is worse, because the victim is flat out dead, and its perpetrators should not see the outside of a prison ever again.

 

[SheWolf]

It doesn't. I'm certainly not a self-loathing woman, and I am a feminist as well as being pro-life.

How can you be a feminist and pro life? (not asking to be a jerk)

Being pro life means you don't give women freedom or trust in making the best decision for themselves when choosing abortion, adoption, or parenting. I may not like abortion from my personal moral point of view, and I would not feel morally comfortable aborting even for health reasons (and I do currently have concerns about my health), but I think women as individuals should have the freedom to legally abort, especially in the case of rape and health. I am not uncomfortable with anybody having an abortion from rape. I am a volunteer and advocate for abused and battered women, and I am 100% convinced this is a pro-woman stance.

 

[JayDubya]

How can you be a feminist and pro life? (not asking to be a jerk)

How could that not be "asking to be a jerk?"

Being a "feminist" or not has nothing to do with one's abortion stance, unless by "feminist" one does not mean gender equitist, and instead means female supremacist.

In the latter case, believing that women are superior and deserve special privilege over everyone else, then that would certainly lend itself to a pro-abortion stance.

 

[Paschendale]

One of the problems I have in posting in threads like this is that my position is not readily definable with a single phrase.

Personally I am very pro-life. I find abortion abhorrent and horrific. I've paid my dues to have that view too: 17 years as a single parent.

Socially I think it is a terrible thing for a society to accept that these innocent lives can be sacrificed for any reason or none.

Legally.... well, that gets a bit more sticky. I have three sisters and three nieces in a very tight family. I've seen what a woman goes through to carry a child to term, and it fills me with utmost respect, even reverence, for motherhood. We almost lost my middle niece when she gave birth to her first child, and it was terrifying.

Also I've known women who had been advised by their doctors that they should not get pregnant, because carrying a child to term would likely kill them. My best bud's first wife, for one.

Thus I am rather loathe to remove abortion from the list of options entirely, or to infringe too heavily upon the right of a woman to decide whether she wishes to take that risk, especially when there are known high-risk factors.

Yet at the same time I despise the very idea of abortion-for-convenience as last-ditch birth control.

I believe the unborn is a human life and must be respected as such. However I acknowledge that sometimes it is necessary to take human life, when other human life is at risk.

It also bothers me that the father has no legal say in whether an abortion occurs or not, but I will honestly admit I have no idea how to fix that without imposing heavily on the woman's rights so I generally leave it alone.


The upshot is I would prefer to see far fewer abortions occur in this nation, preferably through persuasion and enlightenment, and more careful use of available birth control resources, than by use of legal coercion, and through streamlining the adoption process.


Not sure what that makes me, label-wise.

That makes you pro-choice. You believe that the woman should be able to choose for herself. You have various conditions when you think each choice is the right one, but ultimately, you don't seem to think that anyone else should decide for her. That's pro-choice.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

You are making the logical fallacy of equivocation between a 'child' and 'a fetus'. As such, you are deign unspeakable evil, and showing degenerate morals

Once upon a time, people who opposed slavery were making exactly the same fallacy by failing to distinguish between a “human being” and a “nigger”. Those who told them it was a fallacy then were just as wrong as you are now for telling me that it's a fallacy. A human being is a human being.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Not to mention the infringing of right of the man that raped her to spread his genes. That is what sex is about, Men spreading their genes. Women are just incidental in the process, their feelings don't matter.

The child isn't responsible for the crime committed by his father.

 

[JayDubya]

You are making the logical fallacy of equivocation between a 'child' and 'a fetus'. As such, you are deign unspeakable evil, and showing degenerate morals

It's interesting how your post is so full of hatred for your fellow human beings, yet also contains disparagement of other people's morals.

And by interesting, I mean horrendously disgusting.

 

[Bodi]

Bull****.

Rape victims recover. Homicide victims are dead. Multiple times worse? You think the victim that can recover has suffered the worst injury? Yeah, okay. Great logic there, chief.

No consciousness... no awareness... no pain... basically like pulling the plug on a coma patient. Naw, I think rape is far worse.

 

[Bodi]

It's interesting how your post is so full of hatred for your fellow human beings, yet also contains disparagement of other people's morals.

And by interesting, I mean horrendously disgusting.

It is just biological facts... don't fret.

 

[nota bene]

How can you be a feminist and pro life? (not asking to be a jerk)

Being pro life means you don't give women freedom or trust in making the best decision for themselves when choosing abortion, adoption, or parenting.

That's your definition of pro-life, not mine.

Feminism is a pretty big tent. Perhaps you've never heard of Feminists for Life?

 

[Peter King]

Bull****.

Rape victims recover. Homicide victims are dead. Multiple times worse? You think the victim that can recover has suffered the worst injury? Yeah, okay. Great logic there, chief.

So a zygote that does not realize it is aware of anything being aborted is worse than someone living through the violation of someone raping her? And what homicide? You might think it is homicide but that does not make it a homicide.

A woman who has been raped and violated deserves to heal and by forcing her to give birth to the rapists child you are ensuring that what may heal with loads of therapy might become something life wrecking/fatal (as in suicide) for both the woman and the child which at some point will find out that he is the result of his mother being violated and by some anti-choice extremists forcing her to carry a child of her rapist against her will. Try that as a teen or young adult. Hello suicide or crime city.

No, you are not doing this for the good of the mother or the child. Sadly pro-lifers are zygote fixated to the extreme. And to do that you have no quarrels violating a woman's rights to the core. Sorry, but I care about the pregnant victim of a rape and how about she should have the right to decide what happens to the result of her violation, not me and certainly not you or pro-lifers like you.

Because you cannot give rights to something that has no rights (legally and IMHO also not biologically or morally) without violating the rights of women and they do not deserve to be victimized twice, once by their rapist and once by a government/pro-lifers.

Yeah, okay. I do think that when you kill someone you do more permanent and severe harm. No, there is nothing subjective in that assessment - objectively, that is more permanent and more severe harm.

Again, abortion is not killing anyone. It is stopping gestation so that there will never be anyone at all. Objectively you are about as subjective as it comes but sadly your subjectivity is aimed at taking away what is objectively not yours to take away, namely the right of women to choose for themselves because it is her body, not yours. It is not your zygote, you have no say in it because it is not in your body, it is in her body and if she in the early stages of the pregnancy wants to abort what is growing inside of her then objectively that is none of your business.

 

[RAMOSS]

Once upon a time, people who opposed slavery were making exactly the same fallacy by failing to distinguish between a “human being” and a “nigger”. Those who told them it was a fallacy then were just as wrong as you are now for telling me that it's a fallacy. A human being is a human being.

Yes, and they were shown to be on the wrong side of history, just like you are being shown now.

 

[Lursa]

One of the problems I have in posting in threads like this is that my position is not readily definable with a single phrase.

Personally I am very pro-life. I find abortion abhorrent and horrific. I've paid my dues to have that view too: 17 years as a single parent.

Socially I think it is a terrible thing for a society to accept that these innocent lives can be sacrificed for any reason or none.

Legally.... well, that gets a bit more sticky. I have three sisters and three nieces in a very tight family. I've seen what a woman goes through to carry a child to term, and it fills me with utmost respect, even reverence, for motherhood. We almost lost my middle niece when she gave birth to her first child, and it was terrifying.

Also I've known women who had been advised by their doctors that they should not get pregnant, because carrying a child to term would likely kill them. My best bud's first wife, for one.

Thus I am rather loathe to remove abortion from the list of options entirely, or to infringe too heavily upon the right of a woman to decide whether she wishes to take that risk, especially when there are known high-risk factors.

Yet at the same time I despise the very idea of abortion-for-convenience as last-ditch birth control.

I believe the unborn is a human life and must be respected as such. However I acknowledge that sometimes it is necessary to take human life, when other human life is at risk.

It also bothers me that the father has no legal say in whether an abortion occurs or not, but I will honestly admit I have no idea how to fix that without imposing heavily on the woman's rights so I generally leave it alone.


The upshot is I would prefer to see far fewer abortions occur in this nation, preferably through persuasion and enlightenment, and more careful use of available birth control resources, than by use of legal coercion, and through streamlining the adoption process.


Not sure what that makes me, label-wise.

You can have whatever label you want...yet you seem to prefer to punt on the actual consequences to practical application of illegal elective abortion in our society. Your list of personal feelings and observations are actually pretty common. That said, to "force" that legally is to do actual harm to individual women and their place (and respect) in society, as it would require taking rights away from them...again, reducing them to 2nd class citizens.

The harm to society that you suggest is not anything I see at all...most women choose to give birth and abortion is a serious decision for most women. I see more harm in letting society believe that the unborn are more important than women and the fulfillment of their lives in society. Esp if that is forced on them.

There is no actual harm to society by abortion, however there is benefit...fewer kids born into single parent homes, or unstable homes, or ones where they cannot be afforded without financial and personal sacrifices by the parents. If people choose that...and most do...that's fine. To force that on a woman or a couple? That's no moral High Ground IMO for others to decide they must sacrifice their opportunities in life.

And we are all aware of the higher risks that kids born into single parent homes or poverty or instability face...risks that cost society in foster care, public assistance, higher crime, kids growing up with fewer opportunities and never achieving their potentials. This is a harm to society that is lessened by abortion. If that sounds unpleasant, I'm sorry, but it is the truth.

And everyone would prefer to see less abortions, IMO. Of course, the political wrangling over subsidizing birth control and the disrespect heaped on women regarding that is pretty detrimental.....esp. since women never use birth control unless a man is involved and also benefits. But the men rarely have to pay for anything more than condoms...but in ALL cases unless prescribed for a medical condition, both men and women share EQUALLY in the use of birth control and to target women only is unfair.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Once upon a time, people who opposed slavery were making exactly the same fallacy by failing to distinguish between a “human being” and a “nigger”. Those who told them it was a fallacy then were just as wrong as you are now for telling me that it's a fallacy. A human being is a human being.

Yes, and they were shown to be on the wrong side of history, just like you are being shown now.

Those who were opposed to slavery, who thought that “niggers” were comparable to actual human beings, were on the wrong side of history? If they were on the wrong side, then so, indeed, am I, but I think you're mistaken about which side is which.

 

[iguanaman]

How could that not be "asking to be a jerk?"

Being a "feminist" or not has nothing to do with one's abortion stance, unless by "feminist" one does not mean gender equitist, and instead means female supremacist.

In the latter case, believing that women are superior and deserve special privilege over everyone else, then that would certainly lend itself to a pro-abortion stance.

So a woman who believes abortion is a choice is a "female supremacist" to you? That is telling.....do you worry alot about woman thinking they are better than men? Why are you so frightened by women that you need to control their bodies? That is really your issue, not abortion per say..You must know deep down that you cannot stop women from aborting only drive them underground. Don't worry you are not alone..this fear has been the scourge of women since the beginning of man. That does not make it right, it is a primitive and unfounded fear.

 

[The Mark]

We make a huge mistake, with an impact greater than the rape itself or a subsequent abortion, by generalizing what a pregnant by rape victim should do.

They should do whatever they feel best.

 

[RAMOSS]

Those who were opposed to slavery, who thought that “niggers” were comparable to actual human beings, were on the wrong side of history? If they were on the wrong side, then so, indeed, am I, but I think you're mistaken about which side is which.

Well, you are the one that likes that word.. so, I guess you are on the wrong side of history on more reason than one.

 

[Lursa]

Yes, just like in the dark parts of our nation's past, we valued white people more than black people.

And to make elective abortion illegal would legally 'value' the unborn above women.