Why is abortion "ok" for rape and incest?

[Courtneyx3]

I disagree here. I think while it is a horrible thing that the mother went through, it is still a life inside of her. I think she has every right to put it up for adoption as well as the right to keep it and raise it as her own and then one day that child could find out just how close she came to not ever existing. Generally just because of the connection that occurs when a woman becomes pregnant, she wouldn't have any scorn/malice for the child. And if she did there's always adoption.

Right, and I do think adoption is better than abortion, but if the girl couldnt handle even carring the burden, then I dont believe she should. Its AWESOME if they can, but I personally don't think that if they cant handle it, they shouldn't have to. But I think adoption should be the way out.

 

[Guitarchick54]

Okay darling do you not know what usually happens with girls that have babies with someone in their family? When babies that are conceived by two people in the same family most come out mentally retarded or with a trisomy. And in most of those cases the babies die soon after they are born, and they do not die a nice death, they go through a lot of pain and suffering, now you think that a baby that is going to suffer should be born and have to go through that? Not all babies will be like that, but why take the chance. .

Yes incest is wrong! I do not agree with abortion under any circumstance unless the doctor says the best thing for the baby and the mother would be to have an abortion then ok! But other wise every baby deserves a chance to live what if it doesn't die after it's born there is a chance that the baby could live!

And again if YOU were raped and got pregnant would you want a constant reminder? Most girls can't handle it, and some can, some keep their children, some don't. That is fine if they can handle the baby and keep it and all is well. But what about the girls that can't handle the reminder? Rape already haunts a girl, why should she have more pain put on her? That should be her right to choose. It is NOT their fault that they got raped/ pregnant so do you think its fair that they should have to pay for something that they didn't want/ choose to do irresponsibly?

Abortion is not an answer just cause they can't handle the constant reminder something bad happened to them! If you don't get pregnant anything on your body could be a constant reminder! Your not gonna go and cut off your vagina just cause you don't want to be reminded that you were raped!

 

[Courtneyx3]

Yes incest is wrong! I do not agree with abortion under any circumstance unless the doctor says the best thing for the baby and the mother would be to have an abortion then ok! But other wise every baby deserves a chance to live what if it doesn't die after it's born there is a chance that the baby could live!

Do you not know what a trisomy is? It is the condition of having three copies of a given chromosome in each somatic cell rather than the normal number of two. Most babies don't make it after 3-5 days of being born. You cannot just do an x-ray of the baby and see if it has a trisomy or not, this is something you find out at birth. And in the first trimester when you are pregnant you are not allowed to have x-rays, and even if you could, the baby would be too small to even know if anything. So how could a doctor tell you to have an abortion or not? Darling if a baby is born with a trisomy, more than most of them die. Its not a great chance that they will live, so why put them through a horrible death? An abortion would be WAY less painfull!

Abortion is not an answer just cause they can't handle the constant reminder something bad happened to them! If you don't get pregnant anything on your body could be a constant reminder! Your not gonna go and cut off your vagina just cause you don't want to be reminded that you were raped!

Okay well when you are raped come back and tell me that you want to keep the pain and bear this child! OKAY! And what your saying is way out of context and sounds dumb.

 

[Courtneyx3]

http://www.genetics.com.au/pdf/factSheets/FS27.pdf

Go there and you can see that in just the case of down syndrome a women ranging from 20-24 years old has a 1 in 1474 chance of having a live-born baby with ds. That means you have a 1 in 1474 chance of having that baby just come out alive, that doesn't mean the baby will live, but that also doesnt mean the baby will die.

Go to that link and look for yourself!

 

[Courtneyx3]

Trisomy 18 and trisomy 13 are genetic disorders that present a combination of birth defects including severe mental retardation, as well as health problems involving nearly every organ system in the body. Twenty to 30 percent of babies born with trisomy 18 or 13 die in the first month of life, and 90 percent die by age 1. It is important to note that 5 to 10 percent of babies with trisomy 18 or 13 do survive the first year of life. Therefore, these disorders are not universally fatal and, in the absence of any immediate life-threatening problems, accurate predictions of life expectancy are difficult to make. There are a few reports of babies with trisomy 18 or 13 surviving to their teens, however, this is unusual.

http://uuhsc.utah.edu/healthinfo/pediatric/hrnewborn/trisomy.htm

Go read up on trisomys and baby disorders then tell me that its okay for a baby to go through this/ the mom go through having a baby and then it dieing. Tell me how easy that would be! It wouldnt be!

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

You wrote, "I don't have any moral problems..."

I am so happy you wrote that. Morals are very individualized. Your morals are not the same as the next person. If your morals say to you, "Do not have an abortion," then don't have one. If the next person's morals say, "Have an abortion," then she should have one. No one is going to anti-abortionists and saying, "You must have an abortion." So anti-abortionists should not go to anyone and tell them they cannot have one. What people always forget is that morals are inside each person and they dictate how that person lives. They are not meant to be imposed on anyone else.

You see, my morals all stem off one simple rule: Killing is bad. I see abortion as a form of killing. And to simply not engage in it, would not really make me a good person. If you see something that conflicts with your morals, you should try to change it if you truly have a problem with it. It's like if I were a German, not a Nazi, during WWII and I knew what was going on, and I said, "I don't like killing Jews, so I won't do it, but you're free to do it if you don't have a moral problem with it," that would make me a douche.

The Nazis thought they were doing a moral service to the world by eradicating the Jews and attempting to make a perfect society. My morals conflict with such things. We are here to find comprimises. Middle ground where we both are satisfied with a situation to fit both of our morals.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

I understand that there is no scientific evidence that it is a human life, but I know that it is a developing human life. So do you. And I feel like not allowing that human life to develop is the same as not allowing it to live, which is effectively killing it.

It wasn't meant to be a comparison of the holocaust to roe v. wade by any means, that was more a example about moral inaction. Basically, if one feels it is wrong, they should not just ignore it.

 

[Quertol]

Why is it that if someone kills a woman that is pregnant, they get convicted on 2 counts of murder?

 

[Urethra Franklin]

Why is it that if someone kills a woman that is pregnant, they get convicted on 2 counts of murder?

In many countries they wouldn't.
I see a difference in that a pregnant woman is obviously still pregnant because she wants to be: unless she wanted an abortion, but lived in a backward country where she couldn't get one.

 

[Quertol]

In many countries they wouldn't.
I see a difference in that a pregnant woman is obviously still pregnant because she wants to be: unless she wanted an abortion, but lived in a backward country where she couldn't get one.

2 murders...

Also if someone causes someone to lose their pregnancy they can be charged for manslaughter, or murder... Even if the woman had planned to get an abortion...

The thing is though that they are charged with the death of the fetus... Therefore, a fetus already has legal protection...

What makes it so different if the person killing the baby has the permission of the mother or not...
Semantics I say... Its all about semantics...

Murder is Murder! Abortion is Murder!

 

[Naughty Nurse]

2 murders...

Also if someone causes someone to lose their pregnancy they can be charged for manslaughter, or murder... Even if the woman had planned to get an abortion...

The thing is though that they are charged with the death of the fetus... Therefore, a fetus already has legal protection...

What makes it so different if the person killing the baby has the permission of the mother or not...
Semantics I say... Its all about semantics...

Murder is Murder! Abortion is Murder!

Allowing people to die because they can't afford health care and you're too obsessed with your own finances to want to help is murder.

You are one big hypocrite.

 

[Quertol]

Allowing people to die because they can't afford health care and you're too obsessed with your own finances to want to help is murder.

You are one big hypocrite.

I'll reiterate from a different thread...

There's a difference between helping the sick and needy, and helping the lazy bum that wont work...

 

[Naughty Nurse]

I'll reiterate from a different thread...

There's a difference between helping the sick and needy, and helping the lazy bum that wont work...

So I assume from that remark that you have zero unemployment in the USA and therefore can be sure that a person who isn't working is a "lazy bum"?

 

[Quertol]

You know that right now the US unemployment rate is right around the natural rate of unemployment, and thus we're almost at full employment, economically speaking, so that would mean that the vast majority of those that are unemployed can't really help it.

And you know, I can't recall the last time a fetus made a contribution to society. In my opinion, they are some lazy ass mother ****ers!

So your solution would be to kill all those that don't contribute to society?

 

[Naughty Nurse]

You know that right now the US unemployment rate is right around the natural rate of unemployment, and thus we're almost at full employment, economically speaking, so that would mean that the vast majority of those that are unemployed can't really help it.

And you know, I can't recall the last time a fetus made a contribution to society. In my opinion, they are some lazy ass mother ****ers!

:rofl

I suspect that Quertol's plan is to deprive the unemployed of health care so that some of them will die, and not only reduce health expenditure, but also the unemployment rate.

And for the foetus comment I suspect that you'll have both Quertol and Fantasea after you.

 

[Naughty Nurse]

So your solution would be to kill all those that don't contribute to society?

No, Quertol, I think he was making an ironic comment on your opinions. :doh

 

[Quertol]

No, that was your point, or do you not recall? You know:

First, Naughty Nurse said:


to which you responded:


And so if lazy bums that wont work's lives shouldn't be defended, why are you defending those lazy ass fetuses (or is it feti?)

The difference is that a fetus can't work...

 

[Fantasea]

I've noticed that many people who are against abortion make exceptions in the case of rape or incest. Maybe I'm missing something, but this seems like a hypocritical position to take. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Limiting legal abortions to cases involving rape or incest would immediately reduce the annual number in the US from a million and a half to far fewer than fifty thousand.

Saving the lives of nearly a million and a half children in the womb each year would be a great first step that I could support on the road to the eventual reversal of Roe v. Wade.

 

[Alex]

You see, my morals all stem off one simple rule: Killing is bad. I see abortion as a form of killing. And to simply not engage in it, would not really make me a good person. If you see something that conflicts with your morals, you should try to change it if you truly have a problem with it. It's like if I were a German, not a Nazi, during WWII and I knew what was going on, and I said, "I don't like killing Jews, so I won't do it, but you're free to do it if you don't have a moral problem with it," that would make me a douche.

The Nazis thought they were doing a moral service to the world by eradicating the Jews and attempting to make a perfect society. My morals conflict with such things. We are here to find comprimises. Middle ground where we both are satisfied with a situation to fit both of our morals.

Great, those are your morals, be satisfied with them. Do not push them off on anyone else. That is the point I am trying to make. Everyone is different. If you are truly content with what you believe, then imposing them on someone would not be necessary. I do not believe that killing is alright, but that is me. If a woman believes that an abortion is the way to go, then that is her and it is none of my business.

 

[Urethra Franklin]

Abortion is Murder!

If that's what you believe don't ever have an abortion, and your choice will be respected.
However, many don't believe that. The issue is not black and white as you simplistic happy clapping christians would believe (it would be easy if life's questions were so simply anwsered, but they're not - that's why they wrote the bible to keep the simple folk in line - others have learned to think for themselves).

Now if your choice is respected, so you must respect the choice of those who can justify abortion in their own minds. To expect the law to impose your view on others, when your choice not to have an abortion is respected, is arrogant, and tantamount to religious tyranny.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

Great, those are your morals, be satisfied with them. Do not push them off on anyone else. That is the point I am trying to make. Everyone is different. If you are truly content with what you believe, then imposing them on someone would not be necessary. I do not believe that killing is alright, but that is me. If a woman believes that an abortion is the way to go, then that is her and it is none of my business.

If you believe that there is something going in the world that is wrong, you should try to stop it. You should speak out against. If one's ideas are, "Abortion is killing a child... but you can if you want," then this person is weak and hasn't enough backbone to speak for what he thinks is right.

 

[Quertol]

If that's what you believe don't ever have an abortion, and your choice will be respected.
However, many don't believe that. The issue is not black and white as you simplistic happy clapping christians would believe (it would be easy if life's questions were so simply anwsered, but they're not - that's why they wrote the bible to keep the simple folk in line - others have learned to think for themselves).

Now if your choice is respected, so you must respect the choice of those who can justify abortion in their own minds. To expect the law to impose your view on others, when your choice not to have an abortion is respected, is arrogant, and tantamount to religious tyranny.

Its not a matter of choice but rather a matter of life or death...
Are you now saying that they are justifying murder?
Would you sit back and allow me to murder whomever I wanted because I had justified it in my mind and therefore had made my CHOICE? :shock:

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

It's true. If you honestly believe that children are being murdered, then you should stand up for it. It just seems to me that a better way to go about it rather than contraversial legislation would be to somehow prove that a fetus is an actual child, not just a lump of cells.

For one thing it is better to for no abortions to happen and then find out later that I was wrong, then for us to allow abortions and find out later that you were wrong.

 

[Quertol]

Depends, because what about all the women who could avoid having their lives ruined of they could've had an abortion? It'd be pretty bad, considering right now the law's on my side, if I turn out to be wrong, but if the law changes, and then it turns out that you turn out to be wrong, that'd be pretty bad too.
At least you can admit the possibility that you could be wrong. I really respect that about you.

WHat ever happened to having protected sex? I mean there are a lot of contraceptives... If you don't want a baby then you can go ahead and use one or more of the options provided... Abortion has been turned into a contraceptive...

 

[Quertol]

Accidents do happen, and passions do arise, sometimes at times when people aren't thinking clearly, and they make a dumb decision. But I'd guess you wouldn't know anything about making mistakes, because from the way you've portrayed yourself, you don't make mistakes or bad decisions.
Sorry, that's mean of me.

There are such things as the Depo shot, the pill, the list goes on and on... the point is these are things that you have way before you have sex, not immediately before like a condom... I understand that passions do arise and that mistakes happen, that is why we have adoption and the what not... There are things that you can do without killing the baby if you don't want it...