Skip to comments.‘Which one was conceived in Rape?’: the viral image that deflated pro-abortion rhetoric
Posted on 08/28/2012 1:19:22 PM PDT by NYer
27 August, 12 (LifeSiteNews.com) The fuzzy grayscale ultrasound images of the two unborn babies are practically identical. But the jarring question above the images makes everyone take a second look: Which of these two human beings was conceived in rape?
The viewer is compelled to say: I cant tell, they both look the same. And thats exactly the point.
Whether a baby is conceived in the terrible circumstance of rape or in the happy circumstance of a loving spousal embrace, the fact remains that both are human beings. Both, if given a chance, will flourish by being loved, and both will requite that love in due season.
But that is not the answer abortion advocates ever want anyone to give when discussing rape and abortion.
Since LifeSiteNews posted the image, created by Abolish Human Abortion, to its We Can End Abortion Facebook page last week, it has been shared 4774 times and received 4,344 likes and 526 comments. Many of those comments attack the very core of one of the commonest arguments used to justify abortion - namely that abortion is necessary in cases of rape.
Brittany recounted how her friend who was raped decided to keep the child, adding that her friend now has a beautiful 16-year-old daughter named Hope.
Nora mentioned that her best friend was the child of a rape adding that she is the neatest person I know, very caring and funny.
Yoana told about her friend who was raped at the age of 14. She was heartbroken, scared, and pregnant. She never thought about abortion. She said, a baby had the right to live. Even though it was hard, she had family and friends to support her. She took therapy classes. She became herself again after her child was born. Now her baby is 10 years of age. She has no hard feelings, nor does she wish that she had never had her daughter. She loves her.
These commenters hit upon the one truth that abortion advocates know they cannot argue against, namely that the baby conceived in rape is really no different from you or me.
A woman named Yas put it best: To be honest my daughter is the result of rape, but to me I look at her as a gift from God.
Isnt that the truth? Every child is a gift, no matter how he or she came to be. Every child has something special that they can give to the world, no matter who the childs father was.
A woman named Nicole was glad that someone convinced her mother to think of her as a gift, not merely as a product of rape to be dealt with by abortion.
I want to just take a minute and tell you my story, she wrote. I was the result of a rape, and because someone talked my biological mom into not aborting, I am alive and I now have a little bundle of joy of my own. And just so you know, if my daughter ever got raped, I would tell her that that baby is a miracle
Men and women who were conceived in rape are the ones who see the huge flaw in the rape argument for abortion. They unflinchingly point out, Why should the innocent child conceived in rape receive the death penalty for the crime of the father? Some even suggest that the rapist should be the one punished in this way, not the unborn baby.
No one understands the flaw in the rape-abortion argument better than Rebecca Kiessling, who at 18 learned that she was conceived in a brutal rape by a serial rapist who held her mother at knife-point.
Please understand that whenever you identify yourself as being pro-choice, or whenever you make that exception for rape, she writes in her testimony, what that really translates into is you being able to stand before me, look me in the eye, and say to me, I think your mother should have been able to abort you.
Thats a pretty powerful statement, she says. I would never say anything like that to someone. I would never say to someone, If I had my way, youd be dead right now.
No this is the ruthless reality of that position, and I can tell you that it hurts and its mean.
Research shows that in cases of sexual assault in which a child is conceived, the welfare of a mother and her child are never at odds. It turns out that what is good for the child is actually what is best for the mother. Numerous testimonies by raped women who have chosen life for their child, which have been collected by the Elliot Institute (http://afterabortion.org/), suggest that the raped womans loving affirmation for her child is the one thing that really brings her healing and restores her sense of self-worth.
One woman named Anna, after comparing the ultrasound images of the two unborn babies, commented how her own child conceived in rape affected her life.
I was raped when I was 13. The beautiful baby girl that God gave me from that has helped to heal me more than anything else on this planet could have. To that baby you are still a whole person. You are not broken or damaged. You are their everything! My baby girl is 17 now, and she is absolutely amazing! I cannot imagine life without her.
These commenters have hit upon a fundamental truth that transcends biological reality, namely that a baby in the womb, no matter how it got there, is a human being who deserves life. It matters not who the father is. Each unborn child, conceived in rape or not, is a unique and unrepeatable human life destined for greatness.
Julie Makimaa, who was conceived in rape and now works to defend the right to life of all children in the womb, said it best: It doesnt matter how I began. What matters is who I will become.
As a classical liberal, intellectual honesty compels me to proclaim it matters not how the child was conceived.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
Doesn’t every crime have some kind of residual effect?
I have to agree on this one.
The rape argument is simply to get the camels nose in the tent.
Sometimes life at conception is an uncomfortable thing to defend, but it is not complex.
Beautiful, not much left that needs to be said.
No, it is much worse than that, because a side effect would be an increase in spurious rape allegations, with near certainty. It is already apparent that many - if not the majority of - rape allegations are merely buyers' remorse. Adding even more incentive does not help things.
The comments on this topic have become so surreal that I can’t believe what I am reading.
Does anyone know what the bottom line message is supposed to be with all this rape discussion? I mean other than it being
a gotcha for democrats to put the GOP in a corner where they have to express their opinion on it?
Is there actually anyone that expects there to be a law that forces rape victims to carry a rapists child?
And if so, is that a law that a candidate should promote while attempting to get elected?
I am sorry to disagree, you did not go far enough. several years ago I watched a talking heads show where a woman OBGYN said that if she could legally only perform abortions if the pregnancy risked the life of the mother she was certain that she could find a reason with EVERY pregnancy.
These people are insidious and will stop at nothing.
What soycd said! How did we get here?
We’re talking about an “exception” in certain cases. EXCEPTION to WHAT? Abortion is essentially on demand as it is. Why are we talking about exceptions as if there is already a federal ban? (And what about states rights? Will we defend California’s right to determine their abortion laws if Roe is overturned?)
Perhaps since we can’t outlaw abortion for the forseeable future, we can just put the burden on the woman’s choice. If she “chooses” to abort the child, then that automatically mandates death penalty for the rapist if convicted.
That way if we concede that the mother has a right to terminate one life then the state has a duty to terminate the other.
That would eliminate the issue of false accusations of “legitimate rape” too.
The only possible reason to abort a child is to defend the life of the mother. In that singular case, its a choice of the mother as to defend her life or give it up. I wonder how often that medical necessity bares its face.
This is pseudo-science. Many raped women may do fairly well carrying a baby to term. Many raped women may regret aborting a child conceived in rape. But there is no way on earth that every single raped and impregnated woman is emotionally and physically better off giving birth.
This doesn't settle the morality of aborting a child conceived in rape or of a society's permitting it, but people not already persuaded that it is wrong will be repelled by the false absolute.
Statistics speak for themselves .... abortion raises breast cancer risk by 40%.
The question of morality is this:
Is it permissible in your moral structure to kill a child?
The answer to that question alone establishes a firm foundation for the rest of your moral views.
See my reply 11. The libs will use that as an excuse for every abortion
“Is it permissible in your moral structure to kill a child?”
This is the meat of it. The answer to this question defines who and what a person is. Simple and complete. Thank you.
Paul Ryan believes the abortion exception if the mother’s
life is threatened. Isn’t that against the faith? Ryan is
falling away further as Romney’s running mate, doing this, he supports Romney’s THREE abortion exceptions.
And someone put very well...
...”By giving power to the crime of abortion in ANY circumstance, Romney and Ryan are giving power to sin which in essence is a LIE against God. So, here comes the whole means vs. ends argument. Is it okay to prop up a lie against God to win political office for the purported end of repealing HHS, etc? I think we all know the answer to that.”
Since you find these comments to be “surreal” perhaps this series of thoughts says it better.
Everyone who supported slavery was never a slave.
Everyone who supports abortion has already been born.
I have no moral argument with this. The prospect that makes me ill is the rapist coming along after the birth demanding his parental rights and custody, etc. No rape victim should have to put up with that.
That's essentially how Tiller the killer skirted the Kansas restrictions on late term abortions.
While I admit that is a frightening possibility, the thought of destroying human life and having to answer to it before God on Judgement Day, would be even more intimidating.
My solution to that is to make forcible rape a capitol offense. Barring that, a conviction of rape should nullify any parental rights asserted by the rapist.
Speaking from a strictly medical standpoint, perhaps there is a FReeper who has a base of knowledge who can explain how the deliberate taking of a child's life would be necessary to save a mother. Apart from an ectopic pregnancy, I would think that most life-imperiling situations would occur later in a pregnancy, and with advances in neo-natal care, a c-section or induced labor would, in my non-medical mind, be far less traumatic than an abortion and allow for attempts to preserve both lives. Depending on the circumstances, a child delivered prematurely may not survive, but I can't conceive how deliberately killing it in utero would, under any circumstances, protect, preserve or enhance the health of the mother.
Having said that, in the extreme hypothetical, where it could be demonstrated that the child had to be killed to save the mother's life, and there was no other option, I would view it as I would a justifiable homocide.
It's an extreme situation and I suppose it requires an extreme analogy, but suppose a 20-year-old who was truly insane, and like an unborn child, had absolutely no capacity whatsoever to differentiate right from wrong, posed an immediate, direct threat to the life of his mother, I don't think there's a FReeper here who would deny the mother the use of lethal force to defend her life. It would be sad, traumatic and tragic, but it would be necessary. Similarly, if a compelling case could be made that the mother's only option to preserve her life was to kill her unborn child, then I would view that too as tragic, but justifiable. I just think that's an extreme case, and would think that in all but very, very rare exceptions induced labor, or c-section would be viable, if not better options and offer the opportunity to save both lives.
That’s obvious, and it could have been done fifty years ago. What has changed is the culture. When New York relaxed its abortion laws around 1972, the proviso was that abortion would be allowed in cases where it was necessary to safeguard the mother’s health. A standard that was so loose that effectively any pretext could be used to medically justify an abortion. Abortion mills made little pretext about determining the health issues. If you showed up, you needed the “health services” on offer.
This article is a definite bookmark for me. I hope others will read it and send it along for many to read. I am sure that it will be used to change hearts and minds.
I have never heard of such a thing, since the rapist is likely serving a serious prison sentence, and anyway, parental rights can be terminated by the courts.
If you know of such a case I'd be interested in hearing about it.
If you do that you will have a lot more dead rape victims, as the perp incurs no additional punishment by eliminating the main witness against him. Bad idea. Bad bad. And it's "capital."
Nope. I oppose abortion. But our courts are sick - I wouldn’t put it past some judge to award parental rights to a rapist.
“My solution to that is to make forcible rape a capitol offense. Barring that, a conviction of rape should nullify any parental rights asserted by the rapist.”
Rape is far too easy to lie about to give an accused person the death penalty. Just look at that Georgia teenager that just did five years and missed playing college football because a girl lied. She admitted it recently and he was released. Another inmate in Oklahoma was released after sixteen years when DNA evidence proved he was not the perpetrator. Regardless, I agree no baby should receive the death penalty because of the circumstances of his/her conception.