|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 5:35 pm
I have seen MANY pro-lifers that have the 'rape/incest exception' in their pro-life arguments.
I would like to know, why?
To clarify, as this seems awfully short to me; Why do pro-lifers make an exception to their 'noone should have abortions' rule in the cases of rape or incest?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 6:35 pm
I know you can't read my reply because I hurt your feelings, but I do have thoughts on it.
I don't make that argument, but I can understand people who do. Legally, responsibility factors into decisions made in law. An argument can be made that a woman isn't responsible for becoming pregnant if she is raped. Incest, people make the exception based on possibility of birth defects or the possibility that the incestuous sex was abusive, like the case of a father raping his daughter or using his influence to coerce her (I personally put that in the category of rape).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 6:46 pm
Hmm... And I have no idea if you can see my post either, because it's entirely possible you blocked me too. xd
I do not make that exception, but I understand why people do. Many people feel that the responsibility of the mother is a large part of why abortion should be illegal; That the mother put the child there through an action where pregnancy was a known possible result, voiding her right to bodily integrity. In the cases of rape and, not always but frequently, incest, that responsibility is not there, and so some would say that it should be a legal, although probably not encouraged, reason for abortion.
Really, I find it amusing so many Pro-Choicers point this supposed flaw out; There are many points in debate when I am saying, "Blah blah blah, fully consensual sex, blah blah blah" and a Pro-Choicer says, "Well yeah, but what about in the case of rape?" And then in the future I see the same Pro-Choicer asking why there are Pro-Lifers who support abortion in the case of rape. It's like, duh! You made the argument for Pro-Lifers making exceptions in the case of rape yourself, how can you not understand?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 7:06 pm
I.Am Hmm... And I have no idea if you can see my post either, because it's entirely possible you blocked me too. xd I do not make that exception, but I understand why people do. Many people feel that the responsibility of the mother is a large part of why abortion should be illegal; That the mother put the child there through an action where pregnancy was a known possible result, voiding her right to bodily integrity. In the cases of rape and, not always but frequently, incest, that responsibility is not there, and so some would say that it should be a legal, although probably not encouraged, reason for abortion. Really, I find it amusing so many Pro-Choicers point this supposed flaw out; There are many points in debate when I am saying, "Blah blah blah, fully consensual sex, blah blah blah" and a Pro-Choicer says, "Well yeah, but what about in the case of rape?" And then in the future I see the same Pro-Choicer asking why there are Pro-Lifers who support abortion in the case of rape. It's like, duh! You made the argument for Pro-Lifers making exceptions in the case of rape yourself, how can you not understand? The problem I see with it is that it's more of a 'using pregnancy for a punishment' then it is for 'it's all about the life of the fetus', you know? I see come pro-lifers that seem to be of the opinion that it's somehow okay to abort if you weren't responsible for the pregnancy (ie. in the case of rape), which makes no sense to me. It's like they're just mad about how the pregnancy came to be, rather then the actual idea of killing fetuses being wrong. PS> Apparently someone has posted in here that I blocked?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 7:29 pm
Yep, lymelady. She's interested in debate on this topic, if you care to unban her. XD lymelady I know you can't read my reply because I hurt your feelings, but I do have thoughts on it. I don't make that argument, but I can understand people who do. Legally, responsibility factors into decisions made in law. An argument can be made that a woman isn't responsible for becoming pregnant if she is raped. Incest, people make the exception based on possibility of birth defects or the possibility that the incestuous sex was abusive, like the case of a father raping his daughter or using his influence to coerce her (I personally put that in the category of rape). Oh, I fully agree there, that if it's about the life of the fetus, then rape and incest shouldn't be accepted. But then again, it's more complex an issue than that. For them, anyways. For me the basic argument is fairly simple; The fetus' life is equal to a born human's life in my opinion, so it's killing should be equally as wrong as that of a born human. However, I do see where they are coming from; In my opinion, the argument of bodily domain is the only Pro-Choice argument I can accept as at all logical, even though I disagree with it trumping anyone's right to life. However, in the opinion of someone who makes the exception for rape or incest, the reason the right to bodily domain is weakened is because the woman makes a choice to have sex, and has thusly given up her right to bodily domain by her own choice. Which I completely agree with; It's not a matter of punishment, it's a matter of taking responsibility for a living human being that you have created. Progression is this: a) Theoretically, the woman should know where babies come from; That when you have sex, even with all the protection in the world, there is still a possibility of getting pregnant. Along with this, of course, there are plenty of diseases you can get and whatnot. b) By having sex, the woman accepts these risks. c) By some astronomical chance, the woman gets pregnant. d) At this point, it's not a matter of, "You slut, you went and had sex, and this is what you get," it's a matter of, "You chose to have sex, knowing the possible consequences. You created the being inside of you by your actions. This makes it your responsibility; Killing it is not an acceptable way to deal with it." However, if the woman is raped and gets pregnant because of it, the chances of which are actually very small, you take out the woman accepting the risks; The risks are forced upon her. Because one step in the progression is removed, those who make an exception would usually feel that abortion is an acceptable, if distasteful, choice to make, similar to how many Pro-Choicers feel about abortion in general. It's not because pregnancy is a punishment to women who choose to have sex, but because the resulting pregnancy was not something that the woman could have or should have been prepared for, whereas she should have known and accepted it as a possibility of consensual sex.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 11:36 am
See, I think WatersMoon made a post around here somewhere where she said she finally understood why some pro-lifers make the rape exception, when I explained it.
Here's how I see it: I do not see the woman as having a responsibility to go through with a rape pregnancy because the pregnancy was a forced pregnancy. It comes from the idea in being pro-life that there is a choice made when you have sex that there is going to possibly be a child born, and you have a responsibility to that child. However, in a rape pregnancy, that is forced onto the woman, and there is no responsibility to the child (save for genetic) because the pregnancy was forced, and the life was forced into the world.
If abortion were to become illegal, it would only make sense, legally, to make the rape exception.
I.Am said it better than me. gonk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 1:31 pm
Lady Miyo I have seen MANY pro-lifers that have the 'rape/incest exception' in their pro-life arguments. I would like to know, why? To clarify, as this seems awfully short to me; Why do pro-lifers make an exception to their 'noone should have abortions' rule in the cases of rape or incest? I don't agree with that exception, the fetus is still a fetus no matter how it's conceived. The situation may be horrible but abortion would end a life. My only exception is health reasons (serious health reasons), that I can understand and can actually help someone. This is my opinon and views anyways.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 9:28 pm
McPhee See, I think WatersMoon made a post around here somewhere where she said she finally understood why some pro-lifers make the rape exception, when I explained it.
Here's how I see it: I do not see the woman as having a responsibility to go through with a rape pregnancy because the pregnancy was a forced pregnancy. It comes from the idea in being pro-life that there is a choice made when you have sex that there is going to possibly be a child born, and you have a responsibility to that child. However, in a rape pregnancy, that is forced onto the woman, and there is no responsibility to the child (save for genetic) because the pregnancy was forced, and the life was forced into the world. I remember that! Yes, if elective abortion is unethical because the woman has a responsibility to the unborn human (which I, personally, believe her bodily integrity still trumps), then rape would not fall under that. McPhee If abortion were to become illegal, it would only make sense, legally, to make the rape exception. It would be very hard to enforce. The only thing I can see sort of working would be if women were allowed to claim rape to get an abortion, then if a rape conviction wasn't won, some sort of fine. It would suck, but with the speed of the court system it is the only way I can see to allow a rape clause to actually be enforced.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 9:46 pm
WatersMoon110 McPhee See, I think WatersMoon made a post around here somewhere where she said she finally understood why some pro-lifers make the rape exception, when I explained it.
Here's how I see it: I do not see the woman as having a responsibility to go through with a rape pregnancy because the pregnancy was a forced pregnancy. It comes from the idea in being pro-life that there is a choice made when you have sex that there is going to possibly be a child born, and you have a responsibility to that child. However, in a rape pregnancy, that is forced onto the woman, and there is no responsibility to the child (save for genetic) because the pregnancy was forced, and the life was forced into the world. I remember that! Yes, if elective abortion is unethical because the woman has a responsibility to the unborn human (which I, personally, believe her bodily integrity still trumps), then rape would not fall under that. McPhee If abortion were to become illegal, it would only make sense, legally, to make the rape exception. It would be very hard to enforce. The only thing I can see sort of working would be if women were allowed to claim rape to get an abortion, then if a rape conviction wasn't won, some sort of fine. It would suck, but with the speed of the court system it is the only way I can see to allow a rape clause to actually be enforced. I'd honestly rather have them accept someone's word than fine someone if their supposed rapist isn't convicted, just because in this innocent until proven guilty system (not that I disagree with it) rapists aren't always convicted, and then on top of the normal hardship of going through a rape trial and failing, getting branded a liar by people, having your rapist get away with rape, you get fined. People (men and women alike) refrain from reporting rape enough as it is because of unwarranted shame put on them by others, adding a fine on top of that for getting a procedure that legally you should be able to get is just one more rotten thing to add to the list. It is an issue, enforcing it I mean. You're right, it'd be really hard to do, because women would just claim rape. But any solution to that which involves actions that could end in actual rape victims being punished for doing something they should be able to do by law is scary. Perhaps they could check to see if the woman reported rape earlier on; you don't get raped and then suddenly you're far enough in your pregnancy that you need an abortion as opposed to Plan B a day later. But that still leaves a lot of women who are raped out of it. Edit: Reading my second to last sentence over, I wasn't very clear. What I mean is, it takes several days to become pregnant after intercourse. If you're raped, by the time you get into a position where you would need an abortion, you would have time to file a police report. I'm not saying it's easy to get Plan B, just that if enough time goes by that you need more than Plan B, you've had time to file a report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 12:31 pm
lymelady WatersMoon110 It would be very hard to enforce. The only thing I can see sort of working would be if women were allowed to claim rape to get an abortion, then if a rape conviction wasn't won, some sort of fine. It would suck, but with the speed of the court system it is the only way I can see to allow a rape clause to actually be enforced. I'd honestly rather have them accept someone's word than fine someone if their supposed rapist isn't convicted, just because in this innocent until proven guilty system (not that I disagree with it) rapists aren't always convicted, and then on top of the normal hardship of going through a rape trial and failing, getting branded a liar by people, having your rapist get away with rape, you get fined. People (men and women alike) refrain from reporting rape enough as it is because of unwarranted shame put on them by others, adding a fine on top of that for getting a procedure that legally you should be able to get is just one more rotten thing to add to the list. It is an issue, enforcing it I mean. You're right, it'd be really hard to do, because women would just claim rape. But any solution to that which involves actions that could end in actual rape victims being punished for doing something they should be able to do by law is scary. Perhaps they could check to see if the woman reported rape earlier on; you don't get raped and then suddenly you're far enough in your pregnancy that you need an abortion as opposed to Plan B a day later. But that still leaves a lot of women who are raped out of it. Edit: Reading my second to last sentence over, I wasn't very clear. What I mean is, it takes several days to become pregnant after intercourse. If you're raped, by the time you get into a position where you would need an abortion, you would have time to file a police report. I'm not saying it's easy to get Plan B, just that if enough time goes by that you need more than Plan B, you've had time to file a report. Maybe. But some people would not feel comfortable reporting a rape quickly. Even those who would pick up Plan B after might not report the rape. It would probably come down to just trusting people who said they were raped. And, frankly, I think a lot of women would lie because they are scared of going through an unintentional pregnancy. A rape exception would be really hard to enforce. Oh, and the OP mentioned an incest exception. I don't really understand why this would be called for (since a family member raping one is still rape, so only consensual incest would be included under this exception).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 4:09 pm
I.Am Yep, lymelady. She's interested in debate on this topic, if you care to unban her. XD lymelady I know you can't read my reply because I hurt your feelings, but I do have thoughts on it. I don't make that argument, but I can understand people who do. Legally, responsibility factors into decisions made in law. An argument can be made that a woman isn't responsible for becoming pregnant if she is raped. Incest, people make the exception based on possibility of birth defects or the possibility that the incestuous sex was abusive, like the case of a father raping his daughter or using his influence to coerce her (I personally put that in the category of rape). Oh, I fully agree there, that if it's about the life of the fetus, then rape and incest shouldn't be accepted. But then again, it's more complex an issue than that. For them, anyways. For me the basic argument is fairly simple; The fetus' life is equal to a born human's life in my opinion, so it's killing should be equally as wrong as that of a born human. However, I do see where they are coming from; In my opinion, the argument of bodily domain is the only Pro-Choice argument I can accept as at all logical, even though I disagree with it trumping anyone's right to life. However, in the opinion of someone who makes the exception for rape or incest, the reason the right to bodily domain is weakened is because the woman makes a choice to have sex, and has thusly given up her right to bodily domain by her own choice. Which I completely agree with; It's not a matter of punishment, it's a matter of taking responsibility for a living human being that you have created. Progression is this: a) Theoretically, the woman should know where babies come from; That when you have sex, even with all the protection in the world, there is still a possibility of getting pregnant. Along with this, of course, there are plenty of diseases you can get and whatnot. b) By having sex, the woman accepts these risks. c) By some astronomical chance, the woman gets pregnant. d) At this point, it's not a matter of, "You slut, you went and had sex, and this is what you get," it's a matter of, "You chose to have sex, knowing the possible consequences. You created the being inside of you by your actions. This makes it your responsibility; Killing it is not an acceptable way to deal with it." However, if the woman is raped and gets pregnant because of it, the chances of which are actually very small, you take out the woman accepting the risks; The risks are forced upon her. Because one step in the progression is removed, those who make an exception would usually feel that abortion is an acceptable, if distasteful, choice to make, similar to how many Pro-Choicers feel about abortion in general. It's not because pregnancy is a punishment to women who choose to have sex, but because the resulting pregnancy was not something that the woman could have or should have been prepared for, whereas she should have known and accepted it as a possibility of consensual sex. Put very well. It's not that a rape-fetus is worth less, it's that the woman didn't go out of her way to make it. Loosely speaking, of course. Pun not intended.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 2:48 pm
divineseraph ...Loosely speaking, of course. Pun not intended. Too late, I laughed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 6:04 pm
I wouldn't say I make an exception (maybe, if given the opportunity to change the law, I would) but I can see why it would be a hell of a lot more distressing to go through a pregnancy resulting from rape than one from consensual sex. And while someone might not want to get pregnant but have sex anyway, in the case of rape she would have done everything possible to not get pregnant. Not that I see pregnancy as a punishment; I don't think there's anything wrong with casual sex.
As sort of an inspirational aside, I recently found out that someone I know was raped. She pressed charges, and the sack of s**t will be rotting in prison for at least 50 years to come. PWNED.
Also, my dad recently got a repeat rapist put away for life without parole, someone he'd been chasing for over a decade. 3nodding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 25, 2008 8:30 am
WatersMoon110 lymelady WatersMoon110 It would be very hard to enforce. The only thing I can see sort of working would be if women were allowed to claim rape to get an abortion, then if a rape conviction wasn't won, some sort of fine. It would suck, but with the speed of the court system it is the only way I can see to allow a rape clause to actually be enforced. I'd honestly rather have them accept someone's word than fine someone if their supposed rapist isn't convicted, just because in this innocent until proven guilty system (not that I disagree with it) rapists aren't always convicted, and then on top of the normal hardship of going through a rape trial and failing, getting branded a liar by people, having your rapist get away with rape, you get fined. People (men and women alike) refrain from reporting rape enough as it is because of unwarranted shame put on them by others, adding a fine on top of that for getting a procedure that legally you should be able to get is just one more rotten thing to add to the list. It is an issue, enforcing it I mean. You're right, it'd be really hard to do, because women would just claim rape. But any solution to that which involves actions that could end in actual rape victims being punished for doing something they should be able to do by law is scary. Perhaps they could check to see if the woman reported rape earlier on; you don't get raped and then suddenly you're far enough in your pregnancy that you need an abortion as opposed to Plan B a day later. But that still leaves a lot of women who are raped out of it. Edit: Reading my second to last sentence over, I wasn't very clear. What I mean is, it takes several days to become pregnant after intercourse. If you're raped, by the time you get into a position where you would need an abortion, you would have time to file a police report. I'm not saying it's easy to get Plan B, just that if enough time goes by that you need more than Plan B, you've had time to file a report. Maybe. But some people would not feel comfortable reporting a rape quickly. Even those who would pick up Plan B after might not report the rape. It would probably come down to just trusting people who said they were raped. And, frankly, I think a lot of women would lie because they are scared of going through an unintentional pregnancy. A rape exception would be really hard to enforce. Oh, and the OP mentioned an incest exception. I don't really understand why this would be called for (since a family member raping one is still rape, so only consensual incest would be included under this exception).
and not a penny less
There would obviously be some issues, but personally I like to believe that it would be an extremely small niche of people who would be willing to accuse a partner of rape, and press charges against them, in order to have an abortion. Like... I can see someone going in and saying "I got raped" if they needed no proof, but if they had to file a police report or such than I highly doubt there would be many people who would be willing to go that far.
Especially considering that they'd have to go through with it, because if not they could end up being charged with filing a false police report.
concrete the natural absurd
only killers call killing progress.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 27, 2008 2:47 pm
Beware the Jabberwock WatersMoon110 lymelady WatersMoon110 It would be very hard to enforce. The only thing I can see sort of working would be if women were allowed to claim rape to get an abortion, then if a rape conviction wasn't won, some sort of fine. It would suck, but with the speed of the court system it is the only way I can see to allow a rape clause to actually be enforced. I'd honestly rather have them accept someone's word than fine someone if their supposed rapist isn't convicted, just because in this innocent until proven guilty system (not that I disagree with it) rapists aren't always convicted, and then on top of the normal hardship of going through a rape trial and failing, getting branded a liar by people, having your rapist get away with rape, you get fined. People (men and women alike) refrain from reporting rape enough as it is because of unwarranted shame put on them by others, adding a fine on top of that for getting a procedure that legally you should be able to get is just one more rotten thing to add to the list. It is an issue, enforcing it I mean. You're right, it'd be really hard to do, because women would just claim rape. But any solution to that which involves actions that could end in actual rape victims being punished for doing something they should be able to do by law is scary. Perhaps they could check to see if the woman reported rape earlier on; you don't get raped and then suddenly you're far enough in your pregnancy that you need an abortion as opposed to Plan B a day later. But that still leaves a lot of women who are raped out of it. Edit: Reading my second to last sentence over, I wasn't very clear. What I mean is, it takes several days to become pregnant after intercourse. If you're raped, by the time you get into a position where you would need an abortion, you would have time to file a police report. I'm not saying it's easy to get Plan B, just that if enough time goes by that you need more than Plan B, you've had time to file a report. Maybe. But some people would not feel comfortable reporting a rape quickly. Even those who would pick up Plan B after might not report the rape. It would probably come down to just trusting people who said they were raped. And, frankly, I think a lot of women would lie because they are scared of going through an unintentional pregnancy. A rape exception would be really hard to enforce. Oh, and the OP mentioned an incest exception. I don't really understand why this would be called for (since a family member raping one is still rape, so only consensual incest would be included under this exception).
and not a penny less
There would obviously be some issues, but personally I like to believe that it would be an extremely small niche of people who would be willing to accuse a partner of rape, and press charges against them, in order to have an abortion. Like... I can see someone going in and saying "I got raped" if they needed no proof, but if they had to file a police report or such than I highly doubt there would be many people who would be willing to go that far.
Especially considering that they'd have to go through with it, because if not they could end up being charged with filing a false police report.
concrete the natural absurd
only killers call killing progress.
While there may be less people claim to have been raped in order to get abortion, having proof (like police reports) could stop people from lying about it. As you said, not many people would be willing to press charges on there partner just so they can have an abortion (even though it was consentual [spelling?]), they can get in trouble for that. Without actual police reports and records, rape exception would be difficult to enforce.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
