What a message!
If the unborn child is a child...exceptions for rape and incest make no sense at all. None.
Precisely. All opposition to abortion is based on the murder of a child in the womb.
Granting exceptions allows for the killing of these innocents when society, the mother, whatever, deems the child’s life less valuable than their sentiments about the child’s parentage. Such a position is clearly not pro-life.
The moral issue is the life of the child, not the sentiments of others. Typically, Bush is lost in the woods.
Punish the baby for the crime the rapist committed. Inhuman and illogical.
Bingo!
Bush's "sweet spot" is just another name for committing murder and a crime against humanity.
If you think about it, incest, if it isn’t rape, is mutually consented to.
So, they don’t really need incest in there. Just rape.
And rape is no reason to dismember a different human being.
Bingo.
Killing children is a bad thing — even if the child’s father was a creep.
What a message!
I haven’t honestly sat down to noodle out these ‘muddied waters’, but I’ll lay it out and listen to all comers.
For the ‘life of Mother’ exemption (VERY rare, if at all, from all I’m read/heard), I would leave that to doctors to determine before ‘mom’ had any say. Best to documented to the nines if it goes through for any indication it was not so, doc loses their license. Overall, I think it a moot talking point vs. % chance of it happening/happened.
As for rape and incest, here, it gets tricky for me.
Incest: We talking ‘rape’ incest? Or knowing before (cousins in love) vs. after (long lost family member/adopted)?
Incest? No.
Rape? Yes, I understand the basis of ‘child did no harm’. I too understand you’re asking someone, possibly a CHILD, to bear the burden until birth. IMO, that can be *worse* than a victim reliving the event in their mind/memory (having that physical reminder).
How do you tell someone to STILL treat it right, don’t drink/drugs/etc., no harm-to-self to abort?
True, there will be some you can talk into going to term and giving up for adoption (best worst case scenario), maybe even bribe them to do so (on the taxpayer dime??), but to demand, by LAW, they *MUST*?? IMO, THAT is a bridge too far.
If they do XYZ to abort? Do they go to jail?
If they abort for no reason of its own?
How do you separate self-induced vs. ‘environmental’ or ‘conditional’? You lock ‘em up for 9-mo to ENSURE they treat themselves and the new life properly? The law barely does squat vs. the crack-head mother who continues to pop out brood after brood; but ‘this/these’ case(s) are different??
Just this ONE area opens up a lifetimes worth of questions. Just how much harm do you visit upon the host?