Posted on 08/25/2012 8:30:09 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Abortion only continues the cycle of violence.
END OF COMMENT
I’m willing to accept the “three exceptions” if it will get the ball rolling to stop the other 98% of abortions that don’t fit these categories.
Once we’ve legally stopped the other 98%, THEN we can argue about the rest. Until then, it is a waste of our time.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
I agree with your position both morally and politically.
IMHO, the way we cut through all the awkwardness to make this politically viable is to state our position like this:
"We are pro-choice. With consensual sex, the mother has made the choice. If you become pregnant through consensual sex, abortion will not be allowed, except to save the life of the mother.
In the case of rape or incest, the mother did not have a choice. Abortion will be allowed."
I am a man, and I cannot begin to imagine the phenomenal anguish that a woman, or child in many cases, must undergo when impregnated because of rape or incest. That decision must be between he and her god. For us to propose to legislate against that would be political suicide, and would keep us preventing all those other abortions resulting from consensual sex.
Let's get the victory now, move the ball toward our goal line, and worry about the rest later.
My perspective...
So we address one violent attack by committing another?
inre:19..i always counter with why is it the innocent child who must pay the price?
You spew their crap. You are in favor of killing babies.
Sangerite.
Whatever you think is right for your state.
Simple question: What did the baby do to deserve capital punishment?
No, I am not in favor of killing babies. I support the decision of a rape victim, whichever way she decides to go.
You do realize that other people call people like you crazy for a reason right?
Stop being psychotic.
So. If she decides to kill a baby - you are OK with that?
“...other people call people like you crazy for a reason right?”
Yeah. Liberals do it. I’m proud to be held in contempt by them.
“Stop being psychotic.”
Was not aware being pro-life was same as being psychotic. But if you say so....
I have a feeling a lot of people call you crazy for a reason.
As has already been stated, the abortion is another assault on the body of the rape/incest victim.
Another point is that it is often the perpetrator that pressures the victim to have an abortion in order to keep the crime undetected. This is why there are laws about taking a minor across state lines to have an abortion.
“But I am just going to tell you this. Forcing a woman to bear the child of her rapist is an extreme position, and I do not care how you try and justify it. It will NEVER be passed into law, so just keep keep on discussing it academically amongst yourselves if it makes you feel better, mmmk?”
I agree.
Call it whatever you want. I answered the question and I’m sticking by my answer.
I would never force by law a woman to bear the child of her rapist. If she chooses to bear that child, then God Bless her, if she chooses to not bear that child, then God Bless her.
And may God damn the rapist for creating this terrible situation.
If you are trying to get elected it’s real simple:
The rape victim gets to decide how to proceed and handle her own trauma.
Anything else and you WILL lose more votes than you gain.
Most rape victims most likely don’t do nuance. They get to decide for themselves.
“Once we’ve legally stopped the other 98%, THEN we can argue about the rest. Until then, it is a waste of our time.”
So true.
But then pregnant rape victims will have to go in front of some authority figure, like a judge, and say, "I was raped. Please let me have an abortion." She'd have a short period of time to somehow prove she was raped. And we know darned well millions of women will suddenly start claiming to have been raped so they could get abortions, and innocent men will be accused! I just don't think that would work. Abortion either needs to be legal on demand, or totally illegal in all cases except, perhaps, when a doctor determines that it's necessary to save the mother's life. It would be a lot harder for women to get some doctor to lie and say that their life was in danger, though no doubt it would be attempted.
>The violence of abortion parallels the violence of rape.
I doubt a rape victim sees it that way any more than the violence of a miscarriage parallels a child mauled by a pit bull.
Rape really is a game changer for most women voters.
>>In the case of rape, incest, or life of the mother, I support the decision that mother makes.
>So, you’re pro-choice. You do not believe in equality, or that our rights are God-given and therefore unalienable.
So, you’re against any Republicans getting elected to office where they can help change the existing bad laws.
Being pro-life isn’t the same as being psychotic, but forcing a woman to bear the child of her rapist IS.
If she chooses to bear that child, then I support that decision. If she chooses not to bear that child, then I support that decision.
So to answer your question, if a woman decides to kill the child of her rapist, yes, I’m OK with that. If the rapist wanted his child to have a fair shot in life, then he should have thought about that before he forced that child on someone who never agreed to that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.