Home - List All Discussions

For Prolifers: Should rape victims be able to abort or not?

by: Banned Member

No. Abortion does not make the rape "un-happen".

reply from: carolemarie

I would be willing to tolerate rape incest and life of the mother exceptions, banning all other abortions.

reply from: Banned Member

I do not tolerate abortions. All abortion is wrong.

reply from: JRH

So you think that people should a legal obligation to help others live even when that person is dependent on them due to circumstances outside their control?

reply from: JRH

We aren't talking about morality. We're talking about law.

reply from: sheri

I'ld be in favor of killing the rapist. Encouraging the woman to take the life of an innocent party may make you feel like youve done something to help her but, from what ive been it only makes the woman feel like she is dirty if she keeps the babe.

reply from: carolemarie

If we had an exception for rape, not every woman who was raped and got pregnant would opt for abortion. More would go to the ER and get emergency contraception.
But it would let a decision in the 2% of all abortion be with the victim, leaving the rest of abortions banned.
I am for that.

reply from: Banned Member

Abortion enablers are for every single abortion. Remember that! It's the 95% and more of abortions that they are fighting for.

reply from: BossMomma

I think they should have access to the morning after pill to prevent implantation.

reply from: faithman

Having killed 3, it does not suprise us that you could find more excuses to justify the killing of more.

reply from: carolemarie

In trying to get abortion banned, the biggest issue for most people is rape, incest and the life of the mother. The hard cases. Eliminate these three things from the abortion ban, and more people would be willing go along with a ban.
Removing the hard case would end virtually all abortions. That is a good thing.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

We aren't talking about morality. We're talking about law.
Laws exist to control moralities.

reply from: CharlesD

I have a few thoughts. If you left that exception in, you would in effect ban the majority of abortions that occur, since rape pregnancies account for less than 1% of abortions done in a year. The truth is that most rapes don't result in pregnancy, about 1 out of 1000, and then half of those women don't abort. It's an extremely small number compared to the total number of abortions done. Along those lines, I think we can also include an exception for women impregnated by leprechauns and Martians as well.
For those rapes that do result in pregnancy, why do half of those women choose to have the baby. That's clear. You already have one victim; why create another victim? There is no other crime where we punish a child for the crime of the father. Many people here would be against the death penalty even for a rapist, but would on the other hand condone the death penalty for the child of the rapist. How much sense does that make?
Once again, what we have here is an abortion supporter trying to use the hard cases as a justification for all abortions. People are always going to say, "What about rape and incest?" My counter to that is this question? What about it? If I give you that exception, would you be willing to accept a ban on all other abortions? Guess how most people answer that question? I have not had a supposed "pro choice" person yet respond in the affirmative. People use those hard cases as arguments, but when you remove that from the argument, they still won't accept a ban on abortions for other reasons. So until you're willing to accept a ban on the other ones, don't go around using the hard cases to argue for the other 99%.

reply from: ProInformed

Folks lets not forget WHY pro-abort males pretend concern for pregnant female rape victims (um want to make SURE they 'can' abort):
"In 2005, the parents of a 14-year-old girl filed suit against Planned Parenthood of Ohio. They alleged that a PP clinic failed to report their daughter's statutory rape by her 21-year-old boyfriend and failed to notify them of the abortion."

reply from: ProInformed

So you think that people should a legal obligation to help others live even when that person is dependent on them due to circumstances outside their control?
So YOU think a woman would want to kill HER OWN baby because of something the baby's biological father committed? Talk about an outdated attitude.
The rapist ALONE is guilty - not the mother or HER baby.
IMHO if the punishment for rape is to be the death penalty, than the rapist alone should be tried, and if convicted, punished.
BTW the pro-abort male obsession with wanting abortion to remain legal so that rapes can be more easily covered up and enabled, has not gone unnoticed.
You never post a thing about advocating for the death penalty for convicted rapists - you just want the innocent mother and baby to go get taken care of by the abortion industry... So you're not so much anti-rape as you are pro-abortion.
You are pretending concern for pregnant rape victims because:
you are exploiting them to keep abortion legal for your own selfish reasons;
you don't really care about pregnant rape victims enough to offer them protection and support FROM those who woudl harm them and their babies.
or you think the only bad thing about rape, or the worst thing about rape, is that the rape victim might get pregnant (and in your sick mind killing the baby by abortion therefore solves the problem of rape - maybe even making rape more acceptable then).
or you embrace outdated, anti-feminist attitudes like the ONLY value a child has is determined by who the male biological parent is.
or you harbor nasty, hateful, prejudicial attitudes towards the innocent babies conceived by rape, so hateful that you want them to be brutally and violently killed.
or you still have that backwards thinking that the rape victim is somehow guilty or dirty and that having an abortion is something she can do to 'clean herself out'.
Whatever your reason, adding to the already immense expectation and pressure put on pregnant rape victims, assuming that of course they should be allowed to kill their own baby if the male bio parent is a rapist, is NOT 'pro-choice'!
Subjecting innocent mothers and babies to abortion does NOT help rape victims;
IT HELPS RAPISTS.

reply from: JRH

No, because there is not any argument that can be made that she consented to being pregnant. She did not agree to the pregnancy in ANY way. She ought not to be forced to bear the child because she has not consented to its presence. I don't have to help random people on the street live by giving them my kidney for example. No one his the right to use someone against their consent.
Uh, no I'm not.
Of course I care about rape victims.
This is an issue of consent, and it has nothing to do with the value of the fetus in question.
I think that if she feels that way she has a right to an abortion.

reply from: JRH

As I said to pro informed. the issue is that NO argument can be made that the mother has consented to bear the child. If she consents to sex that is a possible argument, although I do not agree with it. If you have a rape victim, why should she be made to support another person? Do I have to give you my kidney if you are going to die without it? Of course not.
Of course not. I bring up rape because almost all pro lifers talk about how its a womans fault the fetus it there, but then act as if that supposedly given consent does not matter when a woman has been raped. Thats why I bring it up.
I am generally interested in the rape issue as well CharlesD. You see, if a pro lifer does not support a rape victims right to an abortion. then they support someone having to bear a child and succor it while it develops without their consent. If we accept that people have the right to use other people against their will we have a serious problem, don't we?

reply from: AshMarie88

Should moms be able to abort their 5 year olds if they had JUST found out the child was conceived from rape almost 6 years prior? Like, finding out that, around the same time the woman had intercourse with her husband but was raped around the same time, she conceived but was not aware the child was a "rape baby", not her husband's?

reply from: JRH

No, because a 5 year old does no have to use her body to live and does not unless she allowes it.
I think that a case where abortion is fine.

reply from: Teresa18

No. There is a new person who has the right to life. She was violated in a horrible way by the aggressive rapist when she was raped. The rapist put not only her in danger but a also a child that he concieved. The child never asked to be concieved. Now the child is danger of being brutally killed. Both the woman and the child are innocent victims of a crime. Everyone has the right to be free from aggression. She could take that aggression thrust upon her during the rape and use it to kill the innocent child, but then she would just be acting as an agent of his aggression. The child would get punished, and likely with a worse punishment, than the rapist himself. Nothing is going to be solved by killing an innocent human being. I believe that when a woman is raped the government has a duty that they wouldn't have to a regular pregnant woman. They should provide medical care and counseling to her throughout the pregnancy and beyond if necessary.

reply from: JRH

The right to life a person has does not include the right to use other people against their will to live. BORN people do not have this right, which is why when you are going to die I can refuse to give you my kidney, and refuse to give you food when you are staving to death.
A man who has kidney failure never asked for it. Come here while we put you on the table.....
Everyone has the right to use aggression to secure their own liberty.
Nope, she is freeing herself from her pregnancy.
The pregnancy is done. Thats a big problem solved for the woman.....
So you think that even though she had not say in getting pregnant she has to take care of the fetus and let it use her body? Why don't we force people to give their kidneys then to people who are going to die without them? Such actions are the logical conclusions of the idea that a person has the right to use another person to live without their consent.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

But alas, not for the child.

reply from: AshMarie88

I think that a case where abortion is fine.
........ What if it was the man's child, not the rapist's?
Also... say if the woman is 4 or 5 months pregnant (with her husband's child), and she is raped (not by her husband, and that's not how she gets pregnant)... Would you find abortion acceptable in that case?

reply from: Nulono

I've never been able to get a straight answer for this one, but...
Why incest?

reply from: LiberalChiRo

The horror the (often) girl is experiencing. I feel it's more related to determining if her mental health will be permanently, severely damaged by giving birth.

reply from: carolemarie

I've never been able to get a straight answer for this one, but...
Why incest?
Because mot people find that rape and incest are such horrilbe things, they can only see the baby as a further punishment for the girl .

reply from: Timeofgrace

both the uborn child and the mother are victims of the rapist.
It does not seem right to punish either the mother or the un born child .
for the rape .
If some one must die for the rape shouldn't it be the rapist?
not the victims neither the mother or the unborn child.

reply from: AshMarie88

Amen. Yes, the child is also a victim of the rape (and abortion). Why kill the 2nd victim?

reply from: carolemarie

Getting past the rape is hard and it is alot of emotional trauma, then to add the stress of a pregnancy and all that entails into the mix can feel like more than you can cope with. The woman is the victim. And this is a very rare occurance.
Easy for you to say the woman should have the baby, you were not beaten, sexually abused and then discovered you are pregnant.

reply from: 4given

No.
*edit to answer the topic question* No.

reply from: AshMarie88

Getting past the rape is hard and it is alot of emotional trauma, then to add the stress of a pregnancy and all that entails into the mix can feel like more than you can cope with. The woman is the victim. And this is a very rare occurance.
Easy for you to say the woman should have the baby, you were not beaten, sexually abused and then discovered you are pregnant.
Let's say these are all photos of aborted RAPE BABIES:
http://www.abortionno.org/Resources/pictures.html

Oh yes... bloody, dead, god-awfully murdered innocent victim babies are ok because their moms were hurt by A MONSTER... That monster MUST have been the baby... The baby must've raped the mom, so it MUST have to die...

reply from: 4given

It is always much easier to pass judgment when never faced with the circumstance. Truth is you don't know that he/or she has faced it or not. Why not extend that compassion to the innocent victim (other if by this scenario)- the unborn? It likely is not easy.. but the right thing rarely is. Why is abortion a solution to abuse? Does it not compound the suffering?

reply from: carolemarie

I personally don't think abortion is the best answer for a women who has been raped, or a kid who is a victim of incest... but I cringe at the idea of forcing them to go through more trauma. Giving birth isn't easy, it hurts and I can't even imagine how a incest vicitm must feel...
Since it is rare, I believe you can leave the exception for those cases....about 1/2 will not abort.
Forcing them to give birth is cruel. Ending the babies life is cruel. This is a no win situtation.
Leaving the option to terminate a pregnancy in these case takes the 2% of the hardcases out of the mix, and then we can concentrate on ending the other 90%.

reply from: AshMarie88

Get rid of abortion for rape victims. PERIOD. Make the morning-after pill available to them! NOT abortion. Problem solved.

reply from: CharlesD

How do you account for the fact that half of rape victims who end up pregnant don't abort? The number of abortions done as a result of rape number in the hundreds every year. That's a small percentage of the total.
My point of bringing that up is because a lot of people want to use rape as a reason to keep all abortion legal. They keep saying, "What about rape?" I'll ask, "What about the other 99% that are done for other reasons?" If you remove rape from the argument, then the same people who want to use it as a justification are going to find other ways to justify abortion on demand. These so called difficult cases are usually nothing but a distraction from the real issue, and that is that most abortions are done for reasons other than rape, incest, and the life or health of the mother, and there is no adequate justification for those other reasons. Supporters of abortion have to get the argument away from that and onto the difficult issues because any argument in support of purely elective abortion doesn't have a leg to stand on.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

The MAP is not 100% effective... And not everyone will take it. You cannot force anyone to take a medication. It's a good thought and I certainly agree 100% that ALL raped women should be offered the MAP!

reply from: JRH

Not 100% effective, but still something I think they should be given. The major problem is that a lot of girls go into shock and are afraid to report that they were raped, since most rapists know their victims. I know a girl who was raped, and I will never forget the time she told me she felt "dirty....like there something unclean I had to hide and could never wash away". So girls end up pregnant, and then tell people they were raped.

reply from: JRH

I think that a case where abortion is fine.
........ What if it was the man's child, not the rapist's?
How would you know? So i say if the only abortions that were legal were those provided for rape victims she should be able to get one.
Yes, but the issue is different than the rape issue we were discussing in this thread in which the rapist impregnates the woman, so I really do not wish to go into it.

reply from: faithman

Not 100% effective, but still something I think they should be given. The major problem is that a lot of girls go into shock and are afraid to report that they were raped, since most rapists know their victims. I know a girl who was raped, and I will never forget the time she told me she felt "dirty....like there something unclean I had to hide and could never wash away". So girls end up pregnant, and then tell people they were raped.
OK death dude, here is your prob. Very few women get pregnant from rape, and over 98% of abortion is non-medical nesesity. A scank just simply does not want to take responsibility for a child she helped create. Rape was not an issue pre-roe, and abortion was already availiable in those cases. Life of mom was already legal as well. The only thing 100% sure in this, is that once pregnant, there is a little innocent human child growing inside mom. Should a child have to suffer the consiquence of his/her fathers crime? Would we do that to a born child?

reply from: faithman

Finally!!! A real woman with a reasonable voice.

reply from: BossMomma

Not 100% effective, but still something I think they should be given. The major problem is that a lot of girls go into shock and are afraid to report that they were raped, since most rapists know their victims. I know a girl who was raped, and I will never forget the time she told me she felt "dirty....like there something unclean I had to hide and could never wash away". So girls end up pregnant, and then tell people they were raped.
OK death dude, here is your prob. Very few women get pregnant from rape, and over 98% of abortion is non-medical nesesity. A scank just simply does not want to take responsibility for a child she helped create. Rape was not an issue pre-roe, and abortion was already availiable in those cases. Life of mom was already legal as well. The only thing 100% sure in this, is that once pregnant, there is a little innocent human child growing inside mom. Should a child have to suffer the consiquence of his/her fathers crime? Would we do that to a born child?
A rape victim is a scank? She helped create the baby? Everytime I think you couldn't get anymore foul you post something like this and totally redeem yourself.

reply from: faithman

Not 100% effective, but still something I think they should be given. The major problem is that a lot of girls go into shock and are afraid to report that they were raped, since most rapists know their victims. I know a girl who was raped, and I will never forget the time she told me she felt "dirty....like there something unclean I had to hide and could never wash away". So girls end up pregnant, and then tell people they were raped.
OK death dude, here is your prob. Very few women get pregnant from rape, and over 98% of abortion is non-medical nesesity. A scank just simply does not want to take responsibility for a child she helped create. Rape was not an issue pre-roe, and abortion was already availiable in those cases. Life of mom was already legal as well. The only thing 100% sure in this, is that once pregnant, there is a little innocent human child growing inside mom. Should a child have to suffer the consiquence of his/her fathers crime? Would we do that to a born child?
A rape victim is a scank? She helped create the baby? Everytime I think you couldn't get anymore foul you post something like this and totally redeem yourself.
I didn't say that at all. I was making a comparison to a scank, and a rape victim. I never said they were one in the same. You just read that in there.

reply from: JRH

This has nothing to do with medical necessity. It has everything to do with consent.
A woman has no choice in rape; she has no responsibility for any life formed by it.
It has nothing to do with punishing someone for the father's crime. NO argument can be made the woman consented to the pregnancy, so she should not be forced to let the fetus live using her body if that is not her desire. In the same vein, I do not have to pay for you to have a life saving operation even though you will die without it.

reply from: CharlesD

He was making a point that most abortions are not from rape pregnancies, and in those 98%, or closer to 99% according to some numbers I came across recently, you have a pregnancy that is the result of consensual sex. The woman is very much responsible in those cases.
The other point he made is very valid as well. Before Roe, nobody was crying about the poor rape victims being able to abort, because they already were allowed to. Now people keep using rape as a justification for abortion, but in reality it is being used as a way to distract from the real issue. If we turned around tomorrow and banned all abortions except for rape pregnancies and pregnancies that threaten the life of the mother, all the people that were using the rape argument would simply find another argument to use in their support of abortion on demand.
We can debate rape and life of the mother cases and there might even be some intelligent discussion, but there is absolutely no justification for the other 98-99% of abortions that are done for no other reason other than the mother not wanting the baby. That's the real discussion, whether or not someone should be allowed to kill an unborn child for no other reason than just not wanting a baby. That's absolutely repugnant when you think about it, but it does go along with the attitude in our society today that people don't want to take responsibility for their own actions. Abortion is the ultimate act of unbridled selfishness.

reply from: JRH

He was making a point that most abortions are not from rape pregnancies, and in those 98%, or closer to 99% according to some numbers I came across recently, you have a pregnancy that is the result of consensual sex. The woman is very much responsible in those cases.
The other point he made is very valid as well. Before Roe, nobody was crying about the poor rape victims being able to abort, because they already were allowed to. Now people keep using rape as a justification for abortion, but in reality it is being used as a way to distract from the real issue. If we turned around tomorrow and banned all abortions except for rape pregnancies and pregnancies that threaten the life of the mother, all the people that were using the rape argument would simply find another argument to use in their support of abortion on demand.
We can debate rape and life of the mother cases and there might even be some intelligent discussion, but there is absolutely no justification for the other 98-99% of abortions that are done for no other reason other than the mother not wanting the baby. That's the real discussion, whether or not someone should be allowed to kill an unborn child for no other reason than just not wanting a baby. That's absolutely repugnant when you think about it, but it does go along with the attitude in our society today that people don't want to take responsibility for their own actions. Abortion is the ultimate act of unbridled selfishness.
You can talk about other forms of abortion elsewhere. This thread is about abortion for rape victims.

reply from: faithman

He was making a point that most abortions are not from rape pregnancies, and in those 98%, or closer to 99% according to some numbers I came across recently, you have a pregnancy that is the result of consensual sex. The woman is very much responsible in those cases.
The other point he made is very valid as well. Before Roe, nobody was crying about the poor rape victims being able to abort, because they already were allowed to. Now people keep using rape as a justification for abortion, but in reality it is being used as a way to distract from the real issue. If we turned around tomorrow and banned all abortions except for rape pregnancies and pregnancies that threaten the life of the mother, all the people that were using the rape argument would simply find another argument to use in their support of abortion on demand.
We can debate rape and life of the mother cases and there might even be some intelligent discussion, but there is absolutely no justification for the other 98-99% of abortions that are done for no other reason other than the mother not wanting the baby. That's the real discussion, whether or not someone should be allowed to kill an unborn child for no other reason than just not wanting a baby. That's absolutely repugnant when you think about it, but it does go along with the attitude in our society today that people don't want to take responsibility for their own actions. Abortion is the ultimate act of unbridled selfishness.
You can talk about other forms of abortion elsewhere. This thread is about abortion for rape victims.
We can talk about what ever we want ot on any thred we choose punk. Scum like you don't run things here.

reply from: xnavy

i had a client who had a baby by rape, she could tell me nothing about the bio father, the rape occurred while she was waiting for the bus
home. she did not call the police and a couple months later she found out she was pregnant, she had the twin girls and she showed me
apicture of the beautiful little girls and said they are the best thing to come out of the experience. she was crying while telling me of the
experience. she loves those little girls very much and does not regret their lives.

reply from: trucker33377

let me see if i got this right? a man rapes a woman! so we kill the baby? I guess I would have to ask what next? if a man commits a crime we kill his offspring. could we then say its ok to punish all criminals children as a way of preventing crime. after all if its ok for rape then it should be ok for murder, or theft. your guilty by heritage. Another thing to look at is how many rapes would be reported if that was the case. After all in RvW that was the first story reported she was raped, only later did we find out this was not the case. FACE THE FACTS Human Beings are what they are Abortion is nothing more then another attempt at genocide. When should human beings have protection? Some say after they reach a size. How about this you start life's journey when a mans 23 chromosomes combine with a womans 23 chromosomes. We are all made up from 46 chromosomes. and that never changes its called a human being! If you want to say its a womans right to kill a human being then i guess that is pro choice. What you say its a fetus and cant live on its own then how about this your in a coma now thats a hassle to deal with all the cost of keeping you alive your care and upkeep. Maybe we should say pull your plug, just to make sure rip you limb from limb, or crush your skull. After all the person who is taking care of you may have a job she wants to go to or school, wouldn't want to upset her routine. I would also say your just a bit of a racist if you support abortion after all it was enacted as a way to exterminate the black population! given the fact that 80% of the clinics are in Black areas and school, not to long ago Chicago wanted to put birth control clinics in there public schools hay what a deal rubbers abortions And a Happymeal! not one was set to be in a white school. 3 out of every 4 Black pregnancy's ends with an abortion ! ! ! Rape is truly a horrible crime but killing babies makes it no better.

reply from: carolemarie

It never is about if it is a baby in the case of rape or incest.
It is about if a woman should be forced to bear a child of a violent rape. or incest.
Its about the trauma and misery you are inflicting on her.
That is why the OPTION of abortion is left on the table.
Personally, I think it would be worse for the woman, but taking away the choice takes away the right to regain control. 1/2 the victims don't want to abort. If we did counseling I would guess that most would opt to not abort
Anyways, it is a very small percent of women who fall into this category
The other 97% of abortions is where we need to see it stoped.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

You bring up an important point that I feel needs elaborating on.
After a rape, a woman often feels like she no longer has any control. Aborting can be a way to regain control. I'm not justifying it, I'm just explaining to you why a woman could consider aborting.
What is really the issue here then is not the pregnancy persay, but the woman's feeling of being out of control of her life and her BODY. She needs a lot of love and support to get over that kind of trauma.

reply from: faithman

You bring up an important point that I feel needs elaborating on.
After a rape, a woman often feels like she no longer has any control. Aborting can be a way to regain control. I'm not justifying it, I'm just explaining to you why a woman could consider aborting.
What is really the issue here then is not the pregnancy persay, but the woman's feeling of being out of control of her life and her BODY. She needs a lot of love and support to get over that kind of trauma.
The woman can get over her trauma. Can the womb child get over a successful abortion? All those who say no raise your http:// http://www.armyofgod.com/Baby12.html. [click blue hands for results]

reply from: carolemarie

Because Faithman decrees it there will be no trauma?
Lots of women don't get past the trauma. They are negatively affected for the rest of their lives. Incest is even worse. According to studies 95 persent of women involved in the commercial sex industry were sexually abused....there is long lasting effects.

reply from: faithman

All who think CM baby killer mis represented what I actually said, and put her hatful murderous spin on it, raise your http://www.armyofgod.com/Baby12.html. [click blue hands for results]

reply from: carolemarie

That did it. On ignore you go.

reply from: nancyu

No, we don't kill babies. Not even those conceived by rape or incest. http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j214/yodavater/IamaPerson2.jpg (still) a person

reply from: faithman

YEAH!!!!! the attention of a murderer can sometimes get you killed. I like ignore.

reply from: nancyu

But it is a baby. That baby is just as important, and just as entitled to having his life protected as the other 97% of babies are.
All unborn children are created equal, and they are all persons. Each and every one of them. They ALL (no, YOU don't get to pick and choose which ones) are entitled to protection by the same laws (against murder) which protect the rest of us.

reply from: carolemarie

Never said they were not babies.
I said that this was a different situtation than the other 97% of abortions.
There is a balance between a woman' right and a fetus's right to continued gestation. If the woman needs medical treatment that will end the fetus life, then she has a right to it. If she is a vicitm of a horrible crime, then she needs counseling and help, but to pass any ban the rape incest life of mom exception need to be there.

reply from: nancyu

But it is a baby. That baby is just as important, and just as entitled to having his life protected as the other 97% of babies are.
All unborn children are created equal, and they are all persons. Each and every one of them. They ALL (no, YOU don't get to pick and choose which ones) are entitled to protection by the same laws (against murder) which protect the rest of us.
Repeat

reply from: carolemarie

So forcing a 12 year old to bear a child from her dad is okay with you?

reply from: BossMomma

Abortion to spare the life of the mother has always been accepted, though this happens so rarely as to make it a moot point. In the case of rape, half or more of the victims left pregnant opt for life for their child, in fact in some studies it is shown that abortion after rape furthers the damage done initially. Currently there is no balance between the rights of fetus and woman as the fetus has no rights which is what pro-life advocates are trying to change. You seem hunky dory with the way things are.

reply from: faithman

Abortion to spare the life of the mother has always been accepted, though this happens so rarely as to make it a moot point. In the case of rape, half or more of the victims left pregnant opt for life for their child, in fact in some studies it is shown that abortion after rape furthers the damage done initially. Currently there is no balance between the rights of fetus and woman as the fetus has no rights which is what pro-life advocates are trying to change. You seem hunky dory with the way things are.
Gosh!!!! You really are beginning to sound like one of them pro-life zealots!!!! How "anti woman" of you. Hater!!!!

reply from: carolemarie

Abortion to spare the life of the mother has always been accepted, though this happens so rarely as to make it a moot point. In the case of rape, half or more of the victims left pregnant opt for life for their child, in fact in some studies it is shown that abortion after rape furthers the damage done initially. Currently there is no balance between the rights of fetus and woman as the fetus has no rights which is what pro-life advocates are trying to change. You seem hunky dory with the way things are.
Actually I want to see all elective abortion banned and counseling mandated for the other (rape and incest cases)
And I don't want BC banned or emergency contraception banned either.

reply from: BossMomma

Abortion to spare the life of the mother has always been accepted, though this happens so rarely as to make it a moot point. In the case of rape, half or more of the victims left pregnant opt for life for their child, in fact in some studies it is shown that abortion after rape furthers the damage done initially. Currently there is no balance between the rights of fetus and woman as the fetus has no rights which is what pro-life advocates are trying to change. You seem hunky dory with the way things are.
Gosh!!!! You really are beginning to sound like one of them pro-life zealots!!!! How "anti woman" of you. Hater!!!!
As Judge Judy would say...blech!

reply from: JRH

But it is a baby. That baby is just as important, and just as entitled to having his life protected as the other 97% of babies are.
All unborn children are created equal, and they are all persons. Each and every one of them. They ALL (no, YOU don't get to pick and choose which ones) are entitled to protection by the same laws (against murder) which protect the rest of us.
Your problem is that even people can not use other people to live without their consent. Even if a fetus is a person it is not allowed to use a woman has been raped when she had nothing to do with its creation. It makes her a slave to the fetus. If you are going to die can you take someone kidney without asking? No, you can't.

reply from: JRH

You are pro slavery. "Hey sorry you got raped! You get to be the possession of this child. But wait there is more! We are going to FORCE you to go to our counseling sessions even if you don't want to do so! Isn't that nice of us?"
You disgust me

reply from: Banned Member

Shouldn't Planned Parenthood report rape when they know that it is occurring?

reply from: LiberalChiRo

You are pro slavery. "Hey sorry you got raped! You get to be the possession of this child. But wait there is more! We are going to FORCE you to go to our counseling sessions even if you don't want to do so! Isn't that nice of us?"
You disgust me
Because letting her be a slave to her negative emotions, giving her no help, and letting her kill another human being is totally the better choice.

reply from: Cecilia

You are pro slavery. "Hey sorry you got raped! You get to be the possession of this child. But wait there is more! We are going to FORCE you to go to our counseling sessions even if you don't want to do so! Isn't that nice of us?"
You disgust me
Because letting her be a slave to her negative emotions, giving her no help, and letting her kill another human being is totally the better choice.
No I think it's more that you want to keep choice from even rape victim.
It is true that if you do not think abortion is okay even in rape situations you do not care about emotions or concerns or cares of victim-you toss their desire out the window. What if rape victim was already prochoice and wants an abortion? You have no cares about that. You want to push your own agenda on victim. Get them while they are down.
Forcing counseling is wrong plus it usually never works well. You cannot mandate counseling before someone is ready, especially for sexual violations. I have years of experience dealing with this.
There is no one answer it is individualized, or should be.

reply from: JRH

Who are you to judge her emotions? If she does not want to be pregnant she may have very compelling reasons why. She may not be able to disrupt her life, or she may feel because of the rape. You do not get to judge what choices she gets to make for her life. You know, I think people who go to church are giving into their negative emotions and giving themselves a false hope they waste their lives on. Should I try to enforce my values on them bey their emotions negative? ***** no. People get to make their own choices in a just society.
You can offer her help, but FORCING her to take it is worse than not offering it at all as it takes away her liberty.
She should not have to let it use her body, just as I cannot take someone else kidney.
Freedom of choice for my own life is not something won which I will compromise.

reply from: JRH

Depends on the case. If someone has been raped and asks them to remain discreet they should do so, just as a lawyer does not reveal a client's personal information.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

You are pro slavery. "Hey sorry you got raped! You get to be the possession of this child. But wait there is more! We are going to FORCE you to go to our counseling sessions even if you don't want to do so! Isn't that nice of us?"
You disgust me
Because letting her be a slave to her negative emotions, giving her no help, and letting her kill another human being is totally the better choice.
No I think it's more that you want to keep choice from even rape victim.
Not really actually. If you knew anything about my position, you would already know that I approve of abortions in cases where it can be proven by a skilled team of doctors that NOT letting her abort would cause severe and irreparable psychological damage. Mental life is as important as physical life.
The fact is, most women who are pregnant from rape DON'T need to kill their child. They DO need love, caring, and people to help them build up their self esteem. Killing another human being that is completely innocent in regards to the rape is stupid and nonsensical. It is not the child's fault. Why are you promoting placing blame upon it for a crime it did not commit?
If it can be proven that she will suffer severe and irreparable psychological harm from NOT aborting then she should be allowed to abort, as a life-saving procedure. Mental life is as important as physical life.
Actually I want her to get free and highly qualified therapy and prenatal care, but you know... whatever floats your lie-boat.
We force suicidal people to go to therapy. I think wanting to murder your child is pretty bad too. I don't think women should be dragged to therapy, no, but conversely, if she DOESN'T go to therapy, then she can not be evaluated for possibly allowing her to abort for mental-life needs.
That is why I am in favor of individualized evaluations, instead of a law that declares ALL unborn as unworthy of life. I want the laws to focus on the NEEDS of the women, not just their "wants".

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Depends on the case. If someone has been raped and asks them to remain discreet they should do so, just as a lawyer does not reveal a client's personal information.
There are certain things in which a professional is legally OBLIGATED to tell, such as suicide threats, violence threats, sexual abuse, drug abuse, and rape. I can, as a teacher, actually be ARRESTED if I do NOT report hearing such things from a student.

reply from: JRH

Who gets to decide what they need? You? You should not act as if their life is something you get to decide.
Their body. Their choice,
It has nothing to do with blame. It has to do with the right of a individual to refuse to help someone if they desire to do so, as that person has no RIGHT to use them. If I thought of the unborn as people I might support a ban no most abortions, but never ones that had to do with a rape pregnancy.
Freedom is more important than any form of life.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Who gets to decide what they need? You? You should not act as if their life is something you get to decide.
Certainly not me; but a trained professional. I never ever say it is my job, but I love it when abortion-rightists assume that by saying "women should be evaluated" that I mean I will personally be doing that evaluation. Nonsense, of course. What did you have to say to the rest of the paragraph?
This is just logic really; severe irreparable psychological damage is rare in the first place, so to assume that all of the 50% of pregnant rape victims who abort would all have said damage is just silly.
Their body. Their choice,
The baby has a body too. It already didn't get a choice to be brought into this world; and you would further deny it the one basic human right: the right to continue living.
It has nothing to do with blame.
Yes it does. Why is the woman killing the child otherwise? It did nothing wrong; we do not punish people with death unless they have done something wrong.
Yes, there is that right, BUT pregnancy is not that simple. It is not just a case of "I can let you die if I want to". Besides, I don't think it's morally right to let anyone die if you can safely help them. It's cowardly. On top of that, you must be conscious to "use" in the sense you are talking; accusing the unborn of selfishly using the mother. You have yourself quite clearly stated that the unborn is not conscious.
I don't support banning them in cases of rape. I support restricting them and evaluating every woman on an individual basis. To expand, my wish for psychological evaluation would apply to ANY woman who wanted to abort for mental-life reasons, not just women who have been raped. So it's not specifically a rape exception.
Freedom is more important than any form of life.
If this is what you believe, then you cannot be pro-choice. The unborn also has this right to freedom, and you deny it that right by killing it.
But that is only your opinion, and I do not agree. Freedom is extremely important, but if there is no one to live, there is no one to experience freedom. If you kill the child in the womb, you take away its freedom. How can you be pro-choice and uphold such an ideal, when your very "justification" for abortion solidly and single-handily debunks it?

reply from: BossMomma

Abortion to spare the life of the mother has always been accepted, though this happens so rarely as to make it a moot point. In the case of rape, half or more of the victims left pregnant opt for life for their child, in fact in some studies it is shown that abortion after rape furthers the damage done initially. Currently there is no balance between the rights of fetus and woman as the fetus has no rights which is what pro-life advocates are trying to change. You seem hunky dory with the way things are.
Actually I want to see all elective abortion banned and counseling mandated for the other (rape and incest cases)
And I don't want BC banned or emergency contraception banned either.
I don't want BC or EC banned either, not everyone wishes to reproduce and some shouldn't because they would not be good parents to a child. I want to see elective abortion banned as well but, rape/incest abortions ARE elective as they are not medically nessesary.

reply from: BossMomma

Abortion to spare the life of the mother has always been accepted, though this happens so rarely as to make it a moot point. In the case of rape, half or more of the victims left pregnant opt for life for their child, in fact in some studies it is shown that abortion after rape furthers the damage done initially. Currently there is no balance between the rights of fetus and woman as the fetus has no rights which is what pro-life advocates are trying to change. You seem hunky dory with the way things are.
Gosh!!!! You really are beginning to sound like one of them pro-life zealots!!!! How "anti woman" of you. Hater!!!!
LOL The lack of hate in my posts is what seperates me from the zealots, I am passionate about my beliefs against abortion but also understand that whittling the opposition down with calm logic often goes further than with screaming rants.

reply from: JRH

You misunderstand me. I don't mean that you will be doing the evaluation; I mean that you are deciding that an evaluation needs to be done, and that is not your place. A persons right to make their own choices must always be paramount in their own lives.
Its body. Its right to live without the use of other people without their consent. As I said, no person has the right to use another person in order to live unless that person has given them consent to do so. Their right to life in no way trumps the right of another person to do what they want with their lives.
Because she does not want to have it. In any case, I meant that the legal issue comes down to consent and not blame. I wasn't talking about the choice to abort.
We don't let people use other people as objects, even if they are unaware of it. People have duties under the law. One under our system is not to harm another person, even with involuntary actions. That is why we have laws against man slaughter. If a fetus is a person it has a duty not to violate another persons boy without their consent, and if it does can be removed by that person.
You think people should be legally obligated to allow others to live using them? Morality is not the same as legality.
No, a sleep walking rapist is considered the same as a normal one under the law.
It doesn't matter though-it still is using her even though it is unaware of it.
Which in my book removes the choice and amounts to a ban.
Its freedom does not include the freedom to use another person.
How does it debunk it? I don't think the unborn are people with a right to freedom, remember?

reply from: LiberalChiRo

You misunderstand me. I don't mean that you will be doing the evaluation; I mean that you are deciding that an evaluation needs to be done, and that is not your place. A persons right to make their own choices must always be paramount in their own lives.
It's not just me though, and again, that's the point. Many Americans feel there should be more restrictions on abortion. People do NOT have ultimate choice in life, we have all kinds of laws.
Step back and be logical for a moment. Don't you think it's much better that a woman be evaluated for an abortion than to just outlaw it completely?
Its body. Its right to live without the use of other people without their consent. As I said, no person has the right to use another person in order to live unless that person has given them consent to do so. Their right to life in no way trumps the right of another person to do what they want with their lives.
Their right to freedom (birth) trumps someone else's freedom. Or does none of this trump anything else? If so, we end up again at woman vs baby, who both have equal rights and equal claims. Yes she has a right to her body but yes, the unborn has the right to be free. So we are at a stalemate that is going to end either way in 9 months. I just really do not see any logic or reason to kill it if it's going to be gone soon anyway.
Because she does not want to have it.
That's not a good enough reason, because adoption exists for women who do not want to be mothers.
The child did not consent to conception or placement in the womb. The woman didn't consent to sex, but pregnancy happening is unrelated to HOW the sperm got there. If sperm is there and an egg is there, the woman may get pregnant. That's like blaming a lion for eating the gazelle...
We don't let people use other people as objects, even if they are unaware of it.
Either the unborn is an object, or it is a person. You can't have it both ways. If it is a person, you are indeed punishing it for something it had no control over.
One of mine is to report rape. I'd assume that medical professionals would be similarly obligated.
The old self defense argument. That would make sense if pregnancy was always lethal or severely and permanently harmful to all women, but it's not. Pregnancy is not normally a life-threatening situation. Abortion is. You have the right to defend yourself using appropriate force for the situation. Abortion is the equivalent of excessive force. Using a nuke to kill a fly; police brutality. No, the woman is not being "used" - it's more like her body is properly performing the function it was made to fulfill - and if she has patience, her body will be done. Abortion is a permanent, violent and lethal solution to a temporary, natural, beautiful condition.
You think people should be legally obligated to allow others to live using them? Morality is not the same as legality.
I do not think pregnancy is "using" the woman, since it is her body that is voluntarily complying. If her body did not want to comply, it would miscarry.
No, a sleep walking rapist is considered the same as a normal one under the law.
I should hope not.
Which in my book removes the choice and amounts to a ban.
Then your book is wrong. There are restrictions to driving; you must get a license and you must follow the speed limits. This does not mean there is a BAN on driving.
How does it debunk it? I don't think the unborn are people with a right to freedom, remember?
If there is no one to live, there is no one to experience freedom.

reply from: Cecilia

You don't know what they need. You are not even interesting in knowing what they need, it is your agenda that you think they need.
You attach blame to fetus I did not. It is not about the fetus it is about the victim. You don't care about victim so not surprised.
First I will repeat this because you ignored it. It is important: You can force someone to go to therapy but you cannot force them to participate in therapy. Especially sexual assault victims. And, evaulation that is fair and comprehensive takes time. Meanwhile pregnancy continues.
No you want the law to focus on what you think they need as you previous stated.
Ignorance.
With minors not adults per bolded.

reply from: BossMomma

You are pro slavery. "Hey sorry you got raped! You get to be the possession of this child. But wait there is more! We are going to FORCE you to go to our counseling sessions even if you don't want to do so! Isn't that nice of us?"
You disgust me
You find it ethical to kill a born child up to a year old, you disgust just about everyone.

reply from: JRH

We were discussing rape which most Americans think is enough of a reason for abortion.
They should have this choice, particularly rape victims. You know that I don't think a government where you and the rest of the pro slavers prevent rape victims from having abortions is one whose laws should be obeyed.
Ha hah tyranny is tyranny
Freedom does not include the freedom use others as you will.
No it most certainly does not. Can I take your kidney? You never answered.
Umm, have it here means birth it.
I don't understand how this relates to her freedom to not to support her fetus.
No more than I punish you by not giving you my kidney when you are dieing or kill you for raping me.
I would not as lawyers and doctors do not have to do so under current laws. I don't think anyone over 15 should have this reported unless they want it reported.
Not self defense. Is it self defense when I do not give you my kidney? It is the argument that says you cannot use someone else without their express consent. You don't have it you can't use them. It really is quite simple.Just let that rapist drain himself and it will be all over.....
If I was a raped women I would not describe it as beautiful .
Then we can apply this to rape as well since the vagina will become wet even during forced stimulation. If we accept this principle rape would not be a violation. My point is that when you are using someone elses body, even to perform a natural function, if you do not have consent they should be able to stop you. The natural and non natural distinction makes no sense.
Yep. Thats why you can kill him in self even though he did not intend to harm you.
[Q
Then your book is wrong. There are restrictions to driving; you must get a license and you must follow the speed limits. This does not mean there is a BAN on driving.
But driving is available to anyone who can pass the tests which make sure they will not violate another rights with unsafe driving. Your committee *judges* who gets the right to an abortion.
A live without freedom is already death.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

If you believe that last statement of yours, then you are already dead.
You have many laws imposed upon you. You are not free.

reply from: JRH

I don't mean literally dead; I mean that one is essentially devoid of the ability to fully actualize them self and is forced into a role that is not them, the the truest them can not be.
I see you dropped all the arguments, though.

reply from: BossMomma

I don't mean literally dead; I mean that one is essentially devoid of the ability to fully actualize them self and is forced into a role that is not them, the the truest them can not be.
I see you dropped all the arguments, though.
So if the truest they can be is a serial killer they should be allowed to? These laws are in place to protect people from each other. One of these days when your all grown up and you reach the age of reason you'll understand. I've spent my nights for two years guarding idiots like you who felt they were above the law, keeping them confined and keeping them safe from each other.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

I don't mean literally dead; I mean that one is essentially devoid of the ability to fully actualize them self and is forced into a role that is not them, the the truest them can not be.
I see you dropped all the arguments, though.
Because I know I've won.

reply from: JRH

I don't mean literally dead; I mean that one is essentially devoid of the ability to fully actualize them self and is forced into a role that is not them, the the truest them can not be.
I see you dropped all the arguments, though.
Because I know I've won.More like you got your ass kicked.

reply from: JRH

No ,because that violates someone else's rights, which takes away their ability to act. Freedom is the ability to do anything which does not do this.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

No, I didn't. Because I know life is worth living, that all life has value, and that if there is no life, there is no one to be free. I know all of this, so whether you do or not is really quite irrelevant to me. You were defeated, you just simply can't realize it.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

No ,because that violates someone else's rights, which takes away their ability to act. Freedom is the ability to do anything which does not do this.
The only thing holding up your pro-choice argument is that the unborn don't have any rights... and even that is not true. They do, otherwise double-homicide laws would not exist.

reply from: BossMomma

No ,because that violates someone else's rights, which takes away their ability to act. Freedom is the ability to do anything which does not do this.
Right but human life isn't that important right? What's wrong with someone helping to keep the human numbers in check? You don't seem to value your own species after all.

reply from: BossMomma

I don't mean literally dead; I mean that one is essentially devoid of the ability to fully actualize them self and is forced into a role that is not them, the the truest them can not be.
I see you dropped all the arguments, though.
Because I know I've won.More like you got your ass kicked.
It's hard for you to kick someone's ass when your head is shoved so far up your own that your skull is coming to a point.

reply from: ProInformed

True.
And choicists think it's OK to impose the death penalty on babies just because their biological father is a rapist... as if the ONLY measure of the baby's worth or right to life is the crimes of the bio father...

So in cases of double homocide, when a man murders a pregnant woman,
since THE number one motive for such murders is that the murderer is the baby's biological father and his attempts to get the mother to "choose" to abort have not been successful, by the same 'logic' choicists use, the murdered baby is not a co-victim, not an innocent baby, but merely/ONLY the murderer's child, with their right to life solely determined by their bio father's crime...


2017 ~ LifeDiscussions.org ~ Discussions on Life, Abortion, and the Surrounding Politics