Should abortion be allowed in cases of rape or incest?

[pilotsR4pimps 0]

people should be able to do whatever the fuck they want. This goes for rape/incest or not. Why are we so controlling. If they're not hurting another person (other than themselves and the would be baby) then who gives a shit. Our "rules and laws" in this country are so opinionated and controlling. If they're causing no harm then who cares. Like Bill Maher said, " I am pro abortion, pro assisted suicide, death penalty.... whatever gets the freeway moving faster".

[redlegphi 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

not only should it be legal in the case stated by the op any woman should be allowed have an abortion under strict conditions

some of these conditions should take the fathers view into account if not on a par as the womans then just very slightly under them

Exactly! Because once a man puts his sperm inside a woman, he owns her! [/sarcasm]

WTF is up with the sarcasm? I think Dark was talking about pregnancies which are not the result of rape in the second half of their post.

That means the father gets a say too - though the will of the woman outweighs the will of the man. Her body, her final decision.
But to just disregard the father's feelings is just..

Whatever.

"Once a man puts his sperm inside a woman, he shares the responsibility for any resulting pregnancy."

The man gets to vote when he decides whether or not to have sex with a woman and whether or not to wear a condom. Beyond that, it's up to the woman. Yes, if they're a loving couple, she should ask his opinion before making her final decision. But ultimately, it's her decision, not his.

[Baksteen 84]

Suppose your ex-girlfriend calls you up:

"apparently the condom we used that last time was damaged", she says. "My pregnancy test came back positive. No worries though, I had an abortion. But I thought you should know anyway."

Or

"apparently the condom we used that last time was damaged", she says. "My pregnancy test came back positive. I decided to keep the child and my lawyer will call your lawyer about the alimoney first thing on Monday."

Absurd?*
No more absurd than a black and white solution in a complex issue like this.
While I agree that it's ultimately the woman's decision (I said so in my previous post) I still think communication is very important. She and the father should talk about it and know each others feelings and opinions about the matter before the decision is taken.


Edit: Just for clarification, I think I would be much more inclined to be supportive in a case where I could have 'been there' to support her, than be informed of whatever she'd decided after the fact.

*That's the word I couldn't remember in my previous post.

"That formation-stuff in freefall is just fun and games but with an open parachute it's starting to sound like, you know, an extreme sport."
~mom

[redlegphi 0]

As I said, one would expect a couple in love to discuss this first. If the woman is doing what you're suggesting in either of those two scenarios, the relationship is probably fucked already. If the relationship's that fucked already, then it doesn't really matter what the man's opinion is.
As for the child support payments, if you don't want to pay child support, don't stick your ding dong in a woman's hoo-hah. As you pointed out, condoms do occasionally break or get used incorrectly. If you gamble on a condom and you lose, be prepared to cough up the cash for your kid if the woman decides she wants to keep it, regardless of what your opinion on the matter is. The man's only actual vote occurs in the bedroom. After that, it's up to the woman if she wants to seek his opinion or not.

[Ion01 2]

This issue is very simple. It really comes down to two things: 1. An innocent person should not be put to death because someone else made a mistake whether it was a man that raped someone of a teen who didn't take precausions. 2. We are supposed to be free and have unalienable rights of LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happyness. Abortion takes away the right of life whether you believe that life starts later or not you are depriving someone or someone to be of life, thus it is murder.
People will argue they these unborn children are not alive because they can't live outside the mother or its not murder because they just weren't given the things they need. Well, if I took you out of this environment and put you in space is that not murder? If someone is paralized and not given food by thier provider is that not murder?
People say that the real question is when life begins. Well, that has already been answered by the current laws. If I murder a woman and it can be proven she was pregnant, in any stage of pregnancy, I am tried for the murder of two people. In fact, there was a recent case in alaska where a man was convicted of killing an unborn child by secretly feeding the mother some sort of posion which killed the baby. He caused the abortion of a child and that is considered murder by the law.
Well, the mother didn't want an abortion thats the difference right.....If its murder to kill a child what should it matter what anybody wants? And why shouldn't the father have the right to make that sort of decision? Why is the mother the only one? So she carries the child the father is still held responsible and must pay child care. If he is partly responsible then he should have a say. Its her body right.....except it doesn't have the same DNA as her body so it can't be. And if its murder in one case then its murder in all cases. How does whether someone wants an innocent child to live or not determine whether its murder or not.
To allow abortion is to say that not all human life is has the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happyness and to kill a child is in conflict with the law! There is no way around it.

[Baksteen 84]

With me being supportive I meant supportive of her decision. And not everything is/should be settled in court... But you know what - Never mind.

You can't convince me, I can't convince you.
Let's just agree to disagree.

"That formation-stuff in freefall is just fun and games but with an open parachute it's starting to sound like, you know, an extreme sport."
~mom

[funjumper101 15]

Quote

This issue is very simple. It really comes down to two things: 1. An innocent person should not be put to death because someone else made a mistake whether it was a man that raped someone of a teen who didn't take precausions. 2. We are supposed to be free and have unalienable rights of LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happyness. Abortion takes away the right of life whether you believe that life starts later or not you are depriving someone or someone to be of life, thus it is murder.
People will argue they these unborn children are not alive because they can't live outside the mother or its not murder because they just weren't given the things they need. Well, if I took you out of this environment and put you in space is that not murder? If someone is paralized and not given food by thier provider is that not murder?
People say that the real question is when life begins. Well, that has already been answered by the current laws. If I murder a woman and it can be proven she was pregnant, in any stage of pregnancy, I am tried for the murder of two people. In fact, there was a recent case in alaska where a man was convicted of killing an unborn child by secretly feeding the mother some sort of posion which killed the baby. He caused the abortion of a child and that is considered murder by the law.
Well, the mother didn't want an abortion thats the difference right.....If its murder to kill a child what should it matter what anybody wants? And why shouldn't the father have the right to make that sort of decision? Why is the mother the only one? So she carries the child the father is still held responsible and must pay child care. If he is partly responsible then he should have a say. Its her body right.....except it doesn't have the same DNA as her body so it can't be. And if its murder in one case then its murder in all cases. How does whether someone wants an innocent child to live or not determine whether its murder or not.
To allow abortion is to say that not all human life is has the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happyness and to kill a child is in conflict with the law! There is no way around it.

You are male, correct?

Allow me to point out a minor detail regarding unplanned pregnancies - Birth Control is NOT 100% effective. The anti-choice folks always seem to overlook this inconvenient fact.

Given your strong feelings on this matter, what positive things do you do with regard to supporting unwanted children?
Do you contribute to any charities that are directed towards caring for children? Volunteer any time anywhere? I doubt it.

I'll bet that your extreme concern about children starts at conception and ends with delivery, like the vast majority of the anti-choice crowd.

[redlegphi 0]

Quote

With me being supportive I meant supportive of her decision. And not everything is/should be settled in court... But you know what - Never mind.

You can't convince me, I can't convince you.
Let's just agree to disagree.

Oh I don't even think we're really disagreeing. I'm just trying to reinforce the point that the woman seeking the man's opinion in this matter is a "great if it happens" as opposed to a "should always happen" and that what's being offered is an opinion, not a vote.

[Baksteen 84]

Quote

Quote

With me being supportive I meant supportive of her decision. And not everything is/should be settled in court... But you know what - Never mind.

You can't convince me, I can't convince you.
Let's just agree to disagree.

Oh I don't even think we're really disagreeing. I'm just trying to reinforce the point that the woman seeking the man's opinion in this matter is a "great if it happens" as opposed to a "should always happen" and that what's being offered is an opinion, not a vote.

I know - the only difference between our opinions is that I would have written it as follows:

Quote

I'm just trying to reinforce the point that the woman seeking the man's opinion in this matter is a 'should always happen' as opposed to a 'great if it happens' and that what's being offered is an opinion, not a vote.

Which is why I said we should drop it. It's a small point not worth arguing about, if you think about it

"That formation-stuff in freefall is just fun and games but with an open parachute it's starting to sound like, you know, an extreme sport."
~mom

[Ion01 2]

Yea, birth control is not 100% effective......so. People know this and still take the risk. Answer why an innocent person should die for that.
We take the risk to skydive. Is it acceptable that someone should be put to death so that we don't have to face the risk of skydiving? No, we choose to take the risk for the enjoyment and must live with the consequences whatever they may be.
It also doesn't change the laws in regards to murder as I explained earlier.
What does it matter what I do? It doesn't change the fact of the law or life.
And how dare you make such accusations. You don't know how much I donate and to what and I am not going to sit here and try to justify myself to you! You don't know what I am involved in or what I do with my time! You don't know what decisions my new wife and I have had about adoption. You don't know all the wonderful children we spend time with and love us as we love them! How dare you try to point the finger at me and try to make me out as the bad person when you know nothing of my life and my decision in order to protect people who kill children! Which is really worse, someone who kills a child (whether through poisoning the mother or other means) or someone who doesn't volunteer?
Even if such a person volunteers no time or gives no money or anything that doesn't make them bad! They have the freedom and the right to do what they want with thier money!
Who is more selfish, the person who keeps thier money they worked hard for and takes care of thier family first, or the person who kills an unborn child so they don't have to live with the choices they made and so they can continue to go about thier lives and do whatever they want instead of being responsible for the life of someone else?

[Ion01 2]

And just in case people still don't get it...since the original question asked if it was okay in cases of rape: An innocent child should not die because someone else did a horrible thing! The only person that should be punished is the rapist and not the innocent child.
In case you still don't get it. If my wife was raped I would become the most vigilant person ever in making sure the rapist was brought to justice!!!! but the child would be loved and taken care of like any other child!!! It is an innocent life no matter what the situation is and to kill it no matter what the situation is wrong. The law even recongizes this, as stated earlier, and to make abortion, for any reason, legal is in conflict with the laws and the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happyness.

[Ion01 2]

One more question: Who is more compasionate, the person who allows the killing of children so people can go about thier lives uneffect or the person who defends freedom and life for all?

[Baksteen 84]

Quote

One more question: Who is more compasionate, the person who allows the killing of children so people can go about thier lives uneffect or the person who defends freedom and life for all?

Simple.

Apples are black and triangular, hence oranges are white and rectangular.

I'm sorry, you raise several good points, but that is not a question that can be answered except with what you see as the 'perfect answer'. It does nothing to reinforce your point.

By the way, how does your wife feel about your opnion?

"That formation-stuff in freefall is just fun and games but with an open parachute it's starting to sound like, you know, an extreme sport."
~mom

[Ion01 2]

She agrees 100% and we have discussed it. She would also have to be knocked unconsious and I have even talked to her and demonstrated how to defend herself in such situation as sadly we know someone who was jumped and the guy tried to rape her but was fought off even though she was hospitalized for her injuries. Sadly it is an issue that needs to be discussed but she never for a second would ever consider an abortion!

[winsor 236]

Abortion is a poor choice of birth control, but it works.

In the first trimester a zygote is hardly a viable citizen, and termination of a pregnancy prior to the "quickening" was considered quite acceptable up until the mid 20th Century - by virtually all religious persuasions.

Frankly, a vast array of social ills could be kept in check if abortion were kept safe and legal until the fetus can vote.

Thank God for abortion!


Blue skies,

Winsor

[jerryzflies 0]

Quote

She agrees 100% and we have discussed it. She would also have to be knocked unconsious and I have even talked to her and demonstrated how to defend herself in such situation as sadly we know someone who was jumped and the guy tried to rape her but was fought off even though she was hospitalized for her injuries. Sadly it is an issue that needs to be discussed but she never for a second would ever consider an abortion!

That is her (and your) CHOICE. Why should her and your choice be forced on every other rape victim?

If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

[Ion01 2]

Well, no one can vote until they are 18 so can I kill people under 18?

[billvon 2,991]

>People say that the real question is when life begins. Well, that
>has already been answered by the current laws.

It has indeed. When a doctor performs an abortion, it is not murder. End of story. You may want to change the law (which is fine) but that's what the law is now.

[Ion01 2]

Quote

That is her (and your) CHOICE. Why should her and your choice be forced on every other rape victim?

Because, if you read my earlier post, the law says that its murder and you are taking way the unalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happyness.
Its that simple.

[Ion01 2]

Quote

>People say that the real question is when life begins. Well, that
>has already been answered by the current laws.

It has indeed. When a doctor performs an abortion, it is not murder. End of story. You may want to change the law (which is fine) but that's what the law is now.

The real point is that that is actually in conflict with other law that were already established as well as the right to LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

[billvon 2,991]

>The real point is that that is actually in conflict with other law that were
>already established as well as the right to LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of
>happiness.

Not at all. You probably eat meat, which means that you ignore the right to life of animals - because they are not legally human beings. Neither are sperm; neither are human egg cells or even fertilized human egg cells. That fertilized egg cell has, on the average, a 40% chance of implanting and growing into a human being. The other 60% are not homicides, or part of a horrible genocide, or the biggest disaster since the Holocaust - it is the natural process our bodies implement. Nature's abortion so to speak.

The remaining 40% implant and begin development. At some point they take on characteristics of humanity, chief of which is the ability to think. At that point you'd have a good argument that they are becoming human.

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

One more question: Who is more compasionate, the person who allows the killing of children so people can go about thier lives uneffect or the person who defends freedom and life for all?

I don't think it is very compassionate to force a woman to carry the child of her rapist. And doing so is certainly not defending her freedom. I think it is more compassionate to let her make that decision.

[Ion01 2]

Using other animals in the arguement brakes down at the point in which you introduced the "characteristics of humanity". Once the egg is furtilized it has the DNA of a human.
If certain things don't happen right now you will not survive. Does that make you any less human?
People die. When it happens naturally its not homicide because knowone actively caused it. Do hospitals fall under mass genocide? Thats the difference between abortion vs. the "natural process". An abortion is forcing death whether its through actively killing or through taking away its ability to live (just as people could take away your or others ability to live by not providing what is needed to sustain life).

[redlegphi 0]

Quote

Using other animals in the arguement brakes down at the point in which you introduced the "characteristics of humanity". Once the egg is furtilized it has the DNA of a human.

So does every cell in my body (other than the sperm cells, which only have half). So does a tumor. By your logic, if I get a tumor removed I'm committing murder because I've just killed something that has the DNA of a human.

[wmw999 2,447]

You seem to honestly believe that a fertilized egg is the same as a human (although I coubt that fertilized eggs that don't implant would get full funerals). I honestly don't. I don't think those two beliefs can be reconciled.

But the law does not recognize a fertilized egg as a human being. And without brain function, a fertilized egg has no capacity to understand happiness, never mind pursue it. It could be argued that some anencephalic babies are not much different, but that would be a different argument.

It would be hard to argue that babies don't know the difference between content and not content

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)