Would you support a 'rape exception' to a government ban on elective abortions?

Slartibartfast · Mar 22, 2010

Ikari said:
But I don't think that's the outline of the hypothetical. You come from a very developed theory wherein you state that the unborn child is something less than human. However, the scenario placed before us for the context of this thought exercise is to assume that it is now accepted that we accept life at conception. Therefore, a conceived child would be considered a "person".

As I read the first post. The situation is that the supreme court has deemed a fetus to be a person. I took it to mean that I may or may not agree with their decision. As such, I saw no reason to change my own feelings on the matter.

Chuz Life said:
Just like the title says.

It's the year ???? and the anti-abortion movement has finally succeeded in banning elective abortions; making them illegal.

The United States Supreme Court has ruled that 'personhood' begins at conception and that children while in the womb have a 14th Amendment right to their lives, due process and equal protection under the law.

The Constitution remains as it is currently worded.

Would you demand and support an exception to the ban for cases where a woman was raped and she becomes pregnant?

As I read it again, I don't see where it should be understood differently. Laws are only laws, I consider my morality to be a more important motivator at least in terms of me choosing my own actions and beliefs.

MyOwnDrum · Mar 22, 2010

I'm prolife, but I support the abortion option for a victim of rape.

Ikari · Mar 22, 2010

megaprogman said:
As I read the first post. The situation is that the supreme court has deemed a fetus to be a person. I took it to mean that I may or may not agree with their decision. As such, I saw no reason to change my own feelings on the matter.

Fair enough, but what about under the scenario I outlined then?

Chuz Life · Mar 22, 2010

megaprogman said:
Like I said. Actual person > potential person. Its a shame that a fetus has to be harmed due to the actions of another, but I think doing so would provide for the least harm overall in such an awful situation.

Red herring alert.

In my poll question,... there is no 'fetus is a potential person.'

Their personhood would have already been established.

Slartibartfast · Mar 22, 2010

Chuz Life said:
Red herring alert.

In my poll question,... there is no 'fetus is a potential person.'

Their personhood would have already been established.

Only by a court.

I have to follow laws if I don't want to get punished, but I hold my morality to be superior to established laws, at least for me.

Chuz Life · Mar 22, 2010

digsbe said:
I do, but only because in this instance it is self defense. The death is justified solely because the pregnancy would be fatal for both the mother and child. It is essentially preserving life by taking another life away. This is self defense and is totally different from aborting a child conceived through rape.

You are making the (mistake?) assumption that the use of deadly force in an act of self defense is ONLY justified when you are cafing certain death.

And that's not the reality of the laws regarding self defense.

You can justifiably KILL a rapist,.. even if all he wants is a piece of ass.

Chuz Life · Mar 22, 2010

misterman said:
So why does she NOT have the right to abort when a rape has not occurred? That's what you need to explain. On what basis do you oppose abortion in normal cases? That's what is completely missing from you argument, every time. What is it you believe that makes you want to ban abortion for those who are not raped?

Wrong thread.

Chuz Life · Mar 22, 2010

digsbe said:
The rapist is not responsible for the child's death. He is responsible for violating an innocent woman and making her pregnant, but ultimately it is the woman who choses if it lives or dies.

In my opinion, the rapist is the one who placed the child into a situation where it could be killed to protect the woman.

Therfore, the rapist is the one most responsible for it's death.

1069 · Mar 22, 2010

I do, but only because in this instance it is self defense. The death is justified solely because the pregnancy would be fatal for both the mother and child.

Not necessarily.
Sometimes only to the mother. Often, the fetus can be delivered pre-term via c-section, and survive.

If your only reason for supporting a "life of the mother" clause is that the fetus would die too, that's not a valid reason, because it isn't true in many cases. In many cases, if the mother is willing to sacrifice her life by continuing a dangerous pregnancy for as long as possible until it kills her... the fetus has a decent shot at survival.

In light of that, what say you now?

Chuz Life · Mar 22, 2010

megaprogman said:
Only by a court.

I have to follow laws if I don't want to get punished, but I hold my morality to be superior to established laws, at least for me.

Don't we all.

Ikari · Mar 22, 2010

Chuz Life said:
Don't we all.

That is truth. Many of us live by the edicts of the government because we are ultimately unwilling to risk what we have on a revolt. So we all abide by the government. Those of us whom do not agree with abortion are going to accept it as a reality. I think that may be the point of the thought exercise. Envision yourself on the other side.

digsbe · Mar 22, 2010

Chuz Life said:
You are making the (mistake?) assumption that the use of deadly force in an act of self defense is ONLY justified when you are cafing certain death.

And that's not the reality of the laws regarding self defense.

You can justifiably KILL a rapist,.. even if all he wants is a piece of ass.

Why is it a mistake? I think live is precious and valuable. The only justifiable reason someone may have for taking life from another would be to preserve life.

And you can kill a rapist because he is threatening you. You don't know if he'll kill you when his done (like many do). I completely support the right to defend oneself. However, when a mother's life is not in danger, she has no right to take life from her unborn child. What physical or individual difference is there between one conceived by rape or conceived by a married couple who wants children? Both fetuses are equally human and both have an equal right to life. Conception doesn't deem whether or not someone is allowed to live or not. The individual born by rape is no less valuable than one born by two consenting adults who want kids.

Slartibartfast · Mar 22, 2010

Chuz Life said:
Don't we all.

Exactly. Its pretty normal to feel that way. I guess that's why I am having trouble with this thread.

I will answer this because this is what I think you are going for

Assume for a moment that you were convinced that a fetus is a complete human life. Would you accept abortion in cases of rape?

My answer would be that if it was a full human life than it would not be right to kill it, however, provisions should be made to protect the mother from the emotional devastation that carrying the child to term and mothering it would provide. There is a good chance that the child would not live in a happy home and foster care is often a bad solution as well.

In order for this to happen and the mother and child to have a chance at a successful and happy life, someone would have to be willing to step up and adopt these children in cases where there is too much emotional damage. Preserving a life, only to have it ruined by abuse or an unhappy home doesn't do a whole lot of good.

earthworm · Mar 22, 2010

Catz Part Deux said:
Abortion is never going to be made illegal again. it's a nice fantasy, though.

Perhaps in the year 3000, we will be civilized enough to not even think of abortions....Rape will be a thing of an ugly past, but for today, I think that if a woman wants an abortion she should be able to get one....report or no report....we need a better quality of man, this will take time..

misterman · Mar 22, 2010

Chuz Life said:
Wrong thread.

Wrong thread? Are you kidding? It's exactly the right thread.

You just don't know. You have been asked this over and over on other threads already, and you never give a straight answer. I conclude that you simply don't have one to offer.

misterman · Mar 22, 2010

Chuz Life said:
In my opinion, the rapist is the one who placed the child into a situation where it could be killed to protect the woman.

Therfore, the rapist is the one most responsible for it's death.

Protect the woman from what?

rivrrat · Mar 22, 2010

Chuz Life said:
It would be disgusting.

TRUE.

But to justify the killing of a child that resulted from a rape that could have been,.. possibly SHOULD have been reported much sooner would be pretty disgusting as well.

WTF? You under the impression that a woman would know she was pregnant at the moment of conception?

jamesrage · Mar 22, 2010

Chuz Life said:
Just like the title says.

It's the year ???? and the anti-abortion movement has finally succeeded in banning elective abortions; making them illegal.

The United States Supreme Court has ruled that 'personhood' begins at conception and that children while in the womb have a 14th Amendment right to their lives, due process and equal protection under the law.

The Constitution remains as it is currently worded.

Would you demand and support an exception to the ban for cases where a woman was raped and she becomes pregnant?

The child did not rape the woman and going through the pregnancy is not going to end the mother's life.

Chuz Life · Mar 22, 2010

Chuz Life said:
You are making the (mistake?) assumption that the use of deadly force in an act of self defense is ONLY justified when you are cafing certain death.

And that's not the reality of the laws regarding self defense.

You can justifiably KILL a rapist,.. even if all he wants is a piece of ass.

digsbe said:
Why is it a mistake? I think live is precious and valuable. The only justifiable reason someone may have for taking life from another would be to preserve life.

You are missing the point.

The reason that a woman (or even someone else, a bystander) can justifiably kill a would be rapist,... is NOT because he's ultimately GOING to kill the woman,....

It's because they "reasonably believe" he's going to at the very least violate her rights,.. and "possibly" even kill her.

Chuz Life · Mar 22, 2010

rivrrat said:
WTF? You under the impression that a woman would know she was pregnant at the moment of conception?

Objectively,

I wasn't speaking as though it is the first person's account.

rivrrat · Mar 22, 2010

Chuz Life said:
Objectively,

I wasn't speaking as though it is the first person's account.

I don't understand what you're saying.

What you said here:

That said,... do you not agree that the longer the woman waits to report the rape (talking weeks not minutes here),... the more she 'consents' to the conditions of her pregnancy?

Implies that you believe she would somehow be aware she was pregnant immediately following the rape.

Chuz Life · Mar 22, 2010

misterman said:
Wrong thread? Are you kidding? It's exactly the right thread.

You just don't know. You have been asked this over and over on other threads already, and you never give a straight answer. I conclude that you simply don't have one to offer.

My personal views are not germain to the poll question I posed.

Neither are my personal views germain to your answer.

If you are just trying to better understand MY perspective.

Drop the chip off your shoulder and loose the confrontational attitude.

Chuz Life · Mar 22, 2010

misterman said:
Protect the woman from what?

A forced pregnancy that could cause her injury, serious financial and family problems,... possible loss of life?

1069 · Mar 22, 2010

Chuz Life said:
A forced pregnancy that could cause her injury, serious financial and family problems,... possible loss of life?

That's no different than any pregnancy.

jamesrage · Mar 22, 2010

Chuz Life said:
A forced pregnancy that could cause her injury, serious financial and family problems,... possible loss of life?

So none of that stuff is a problem if she enjoyed the sex?

Would you support a 'rape exception' to a government ban on elective abortions?