Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

If a girl is raped and pregnant, should she keep the baby?

Page 86 of 94 [ 1500 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89 ... 94  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,447

06 Nov 2012, 12:42 pm

I knew this guy at work that got a woman pregnant but was ashamed to introduce her to his Mother and then he wonders why she got an abortion.



mechanicalgirl39
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2009
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,340

06 Nov 2012, 12:49 pm

AngelRho wrote:
mechanicalgirl39 wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
mechanicalgirl39 wrote:
I'm frankly very tired of hearing how my rights always come second to those of a 'baby'.

No. Sorry. I'm a human being. Not even other humans get the right to violate me. So yes, if I were ever raped, you can suck my ass and that 'baby' can suck my adrenaline and die. Yknow because being in a country where abortion is illegal and going elsewhere for one costs close to a thousand, my first feasible option would be plain old rue.


No one is saying that you aren't a human being... What we are pointing out is that the child is also a human being. The child didn't choose to inside you and quite frankly, I don't think the child would want someone like you as his/her biological mother.

The reason why the child's rights should trump yours in this case is due to the fact that you are trying to essentially terminate the child's life, while in contrast pregnency is not nearly as life threatening to the mother as it was 20 years ago. Since the fact of the matter is that the one option involves the death of an innocent child while the other we see both the child and you surviving, this isn't rocket science.

What you are doing is taking out your anger (which is natural) and hatred (which is justified), out on an innocent child (which is not okay), because you can't get at the person that violated you.

There is something known as adoption if you don't want to keep the kid, you don't have to kill the kid.


That's not how right and wrong works. You don't get to violate people even to survive. Including fetuses. If it's a person then guess what...it is subject to the same boundaries everyone else has. No born person gets to force access to someone's body even to survive.

And no, I'm not taking anger out on anyone, I'm simply not open to carrying a pregnancy for any reason. I wouldn't carry a pregnancy even if it was from consensual sex (which is entirely hypothetical, because I don't plan on having sex).

If you're never going to have sex, then you're never going to have to worry about it. The problem here is that you're presuming to tell OTHER people what morality calls they can and cannot make. It's just as unfair as men presuming to tell women what they can/cannot do with their own bodies. You've put yourself outside the circle.


I'm not telling anyone what to do. I'm telling women they have the RIGHT to NOT be VIOLATED.


_________________
'You're so cold, but you feel alive
Lay your hands on me, one last time' (Breaking Benjamin)


Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

06 Nov 2012, 1:00 pm

mechanicalgirl39 wrote:
I'm not telling anyone what to do. I'm telling women they have the RIGHT to NOT be VIOLATED.


The child also has the right to life, mechanicalgirl39, how about you read the Declaration of Independence sometime.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. -- Declaration of Independence

I consider "men" to be in reference to humans in general and not specific to a particular gender.



ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 122
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

06 Nov 2012, 1:02 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
I consider "men" to be in reference to humans in general and not specific to a particular gender.


That ain't how the author viewed it.



ComradeKael
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 21 Aug 2011
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 223

06 Nov 2012, 1:06 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
mechanicalgirl39 wrote:
I'm not telling anyone what to do. I'm telling women they have the RIGHT to NOT be VIOLATED.


The child also has the right to life, mechanicalgirl39, how about you read the Declaration of Independence sometime.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all rich white land owners are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. -- Declaration of Independence

I consider "men" to be in reference to humans in general and not specific to a particular gender.


Fixed.



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

06 Nov 2012, 1:13 pm

@ ComradeKael

You do realize that I was quoting a historical document that is part of the foundation of this country and you just misquoted it.



ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 122
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

06 Nov 2012, 1:20 pm

ComradeKael wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
mechanicalgirl39 wrote:
I'm not telling anyone what to do. I'm telling women they have the RIGHT to NOT be VIOLATED.


The child also has the right to life, mechanicalgirl39, how about you read the Declaration of Independence sometime.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all rich white land owners are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. -- Declaration of Independence

I consider "men" to be in reference to humans in general and not specific to a particular gender.


Fixed.


Make that "rich white male land owners." Even White chicks couldn't vote until the 20th century.



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

06 Nov 2012, 1:38 pm

ArrantPariah wrote:
Make that "rich white male land owners." Even White chicks couldn't vote until the 20th century.


Actually that's incorrect Women have been voting in Wyoming since 1870, they were acknowledged of having the right to vote on December 10th, 1869 to be precise, and voted in the election of 1870.

On December 10, 1869, territorial Gov. John Allen Campbell extended the right to vote to women, making Wyoming the first U.S. state to grant suffrage to women. In addition, Wyoming was also a pioneer in welcoming women into politics. Women first served on juries in Wyoming (Laramie in 1870); Wyoming had the first female court bailiff (Mary Atkinson, Laramie, in 1870); and the first female justice of the peace in the country (Esther Hobart Morris, South Pass City, in 1870). Also, in 1924, Wyoming became the first state to elect a female governor, Nellie Tayloe Ross, who took office in January 1925. (In fact, Wyoming and Texas both elected female governors at the same time, but Wyoming's took office a few days before Texas's.)[16] Due to its civil-rights history, Wyoming's state nickname is "The Equality State".[17]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyoming

Again, ArrantPariah I have an unofficial minor in History, some states actually did give women the right to vote much earlier than the 1920s.



ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 122
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

06 Nov 2012, 2:20 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
Again, ArrantPariah I have an unofficial minor in History, .


You're so cute when you pull the Appeal to Authority fallacy.



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

06 Nov 2012, 2:30 pm

ArrantPariah wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Again, ArrantPariah I have an unofficial minor in History, .


You're so cute when you pull the Appeal to Authority fallacy.


That would actually be an effective attack if not for the fact I also posted a source that backed up what I said...

There were western states gave Women the right to vote in the 19th century, such as Wyoming...



mechanicalgirl39
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2009
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,340

06 Nov 2012, 2:55 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
mechanicalgirl39 wrote:
I'm not telling anyone what to do. I'm telling women they have the RIGHT to NOT be VIOLATED.


The child also has the right to life, mechanicalgirl39, how about you read the Declaration of Independence sometime.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. -- Declaration of Independence

I consider "men" to be in reference to humans in general and not specific to a particular gender.


The right to life doesn't mean the right to violate someone else to keep yourself alive.

So, if I'm ever raped? Watch me abort.


_________________
'You're so cold, but you feel alive
Lay your hands on me, one last time' (Breaking Benjamin)


Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

06 Nov 2012, 2:59 pm

mechanicalgirl39 wrote:
The right to life doesn't mean the right to violate someone else to keep yourself alive.


Unfortunately for your claim there, the child did not forcibly violate your body the rapist did, and as soon as the child is able to survive in the outside environment, the child would probably have every intention of leaving anyways.

I'm also going to point out that abortions due to rape are a very small percentage of abortion cases...



ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 122
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

06 Nov 2012, 3:01 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
ArrantPariah wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Again, ArrantPariah I have an unofficial minor in History, .


You're so cute when you pull the Appeal to Authority fallacy.


That would actually be an effective attack if not for the fact I also posted a source that backed up what I said...

There were western states gave Women the right to vote in the 19th century, such as Wyoming...


You're still cute. :wink:



LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

06 Nov 2012, 3:42 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
mechanicalgirl39 wrote:
The right to life doesn't mean the right to violate someone else to keep yourself alive.


Unfortunately for your claim there, the child did not forcibly violate your body the rapist did, and as soon as the child is able to survive in the outside environment, the child would probably have every intention of leaving anyways.

I'm also going to point out that abortions due to rape are a very small percentage of abortion cases...

Yeah, actually, the zef is an ongoing violation of the woman's body. It makes her sick, it makes her joints hurt, it prevents her from being able to sleep, it can cause diabettes and hypertension, it can kill her and it will cause her extreme pain on the level of mortal pain - torture under the Geneva conventions - if it is allowed to continue using her body against her will.



LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

06 Nov 2012, 3:53 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
LKL wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
What if the woman is the rapist and she gets pregnent, does she still have a say over what happens to the kid or should the rape victim be the one that decides?

A rapist should never have custody over a child once it's born, but even death row inmates cannot be compelled to donate parts of their body to other people; even a female rapist should be compelled bu the state to donate her body to a zef if she doesn't want to.


So in other words you're suggesting that a female rapist has the right to kill the child that results from her having committed a crime, seems more than a little sexist don't you think.

No, I'm saying that a female rapist has the same rights as a male rapist: the right to not be forced to donate any part of their body to anyone else for any reason. If you think that we should start harvesting organs from male rapists - say, individual kidneys, chunks of lung, chunks of liver - things that will impair them and scar them for life, but that they can live without, and which some other innocent person out there cannot life without - then maybe we can start talking about forcing female rapists to have to donate their bodies, too. Think of all of the lives that could be saved with a forced organ donor pool!
(/sarcasm)



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

06 Nov 2012, 3:56 pm

LKL wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
LKL wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
What if the woman is the rapist and she gets pregnent, does she still have a say over what happens to the kid or should the rape victim be the one that decides?

A rapist should never have custody over a child once it's born, but even death row inmates cannot be compelled to donate parts of their body to other people; even a female rapist should be compelled bu the state to donate her body to a zef if she doesn't want to.


So in other words you're suggesting that a female rapist has the right to kill the child that results from her having committed a crime, seems more than a little sexist don't you think.

No, I'm saying that a female rapist has the same rights as a male rapist: the right to not be forced to donate any part of their body to anyone else for any reason. If you think that we should start harvesting organs from male rapists - say, individual kidneys, chunks of lung, chunks of liver - things that will impair them and scar them for life, but that they can live without, and which some other innocent person out there cannot life without - then maybe we can start talking about forcing female rapists to have to donate their bodies, too. Think of all of the lives that could be saved with a forced organ donor pool!
(/sarcasm)


What if the male rape victim doesn't want the child killed? The woman was the rapist in this case and pregnency isn't like organ donation because in organ donations the organs are actually permanently removed, pregnency only lasts about 9 months right, you're giving a false equivalency.