19 Mar 2019, 6:07 pm
karathraceandherspecialdestiny wrote:
Arganger wrote:
karathraceandherspecialdestiny wrote:
Arganger wrote:
karathraceandherspecialdestiny wrote:
Arganger wrote:
karathraceandherspecialdestiny wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Arganger wrote:
2, but the rapist to death not the kid, and then give all the rapists assets to the woman, along with fully paid support throughout pregnancy and the option to either adopt out, or be given financial support to raise the child herself.
3, A sooner death is not a better death, a guaranteed death is not better than an almost guaranteed death.
3, A sooner death is not a better death, a guaranteed death is not better than an almost guaranteed death.
A kid does not instantly develop in that case though, it takes 9 months, why shouldn't they be able to get an abortion ASAP in that case. I just cannot agree with forcing a woman who has been raped to carry the potential off-spring to term, they should be able to choose to if they want but it, it shouldn't be forced and they shouldn't be pressured to.
Yeah, if you ask me forcing a woman to gestate a whole new person who is half herself and half her rapist is really cruel--and also disgusting. No one should have to go through that, and bring a person like that into the world that isn't wanted and was created by a violation and a crime. I mean, try to imagine growing up and finding out that the only reason you exist is because the person who half your DNA came from raped the person that supplied the other 50%. How much would it mess them up to know that their dad is a rapist scumbag? How horrible to make all those people go through that and live with those conditions just because of one man's crime inflicted on them. That's not right.
As of right now, a rapist is gone really easy on.
A child coming from it is another victim, it's not their fault that the father was a horrible piece of crap.
Why should a rapist get barely punished, and a child killed because of their father? It's backwards. An abortion wouldn't ease the pain from rape, and both woman and child should have whatever burdens on them eased as much as possible without hurting either.
There doesn't have to be a child victim of the rape though if the mother is allowed to abort before it becomes a child. No children are killed during abortion, only clumps of cells. An abortion would definitely ease the pain of rape if one finds out one is pregnant from that rape, it would certainly be a better option than finding out that not only did the rapist get you pregnant but that you have to gestate the rapist's DNA inside you because you're not allowed to get it out of your body before it grows into a person. A pregnancy is not a child. Abortion kills no children. You seem to need to hear that more than once so I stated it a few times, and here's one more: abortion is not child murder, there is no child yet to be murdered.
We were not considered people less than a century ago. I'm not going to be part of ignoring anyone else's humanity.
Neither an embryo nor a fetus even looks like a clump of cells after two weeks (When pregnancy can be detected).
That's funny, this site still calls it a "cluster of cells" at 4 weeks: http://www.baby2see.com/development/fir ... ester.html
A fetus is not a person, but a woman is a person and has the right to decide what happens inside her body, including whether she wants to let a clump of cells use her body to grow or not.
Ahem, "Had".
I was talking from implantation not conception which is where I got the two weeks, but anyway,
^this is not a clump of cells.
She should be able to choose, which is part of why rape is so evil, but the kid is not the one responsible for the pregnancy.
Then why did the site describe it that way? Sure looks like a lump of cells to me.
That the fetus isn't responsible for the rape is irrelevant--no woman should be forced to carry the DNA of her rapist to term, the idea is very sick.
First off, the site didn't.
"The cluster of cells has attached to the uterus wall and has divided into two parts."- referring to the final action of the zygote stage, during which it still does resemble a "Clump of cells", not the early embryonic stage shown that is right after it.
Second of all, the way it is described doesn't change what it is either way.
The kid isn't the rapist's DNA, rather it's own individual. Rape doesn't result in a clone. And again, a women shouldn't be forced into pregnancy, but once she is, she is. Abortion doesn't undo any of it in the least.
19 Mar 2019, 6:15 pm
There's no need to argue whether a fetus is actually alive or not when I just wanted to hear basic opinions...
19 Mar 2019, 6:18 pm
warrier120 wrote:
https://postimg.cc/YLLRg8Qn
There's no need to argue whether a fetus is actually alive or not when I just wanted to hear basic opinions...
There's no need to argue whether a fetus is actually alive or not when I just wanted to hear basic opinions...
I'll stop arguing, if you'd like.
19 Mar 2019, 6:20 pm
Arganger wrote:
warrier120 wrote:
https://postimg.cc/YLLRg8Qn
There's no need to argue whether a fetus is actually alive or not when I just wanted to hear basic opinions...
There's no need to argue whether a fetus is actually alive or not when I just wanted to hear basic opinions...
I'll stop arguing, if you'd like.
Okay, good then. I know if the fighting continues it will be seen by a mod and the thread will be locked.
20 Mar 2019, 1:44 am
warrier120 wrote:
Arganger wrote:
warrier120 wrote:
https://postimg.cc/YLLRg8Qn
There's no need to argue whether a fetus is actually alive or not when I just wanted to hear basic opinions...
There's no need to argue whether a fetus is actually alive or not when I just wanted to hear basic opinions...
I'll stop arguing, if you'd like.
Okay, good then. I know if the fighting continues it will be seen by a mod and the thread will be locked.
Two people arguing whether fetus is just a clump of cells or not is a perfectly acceptable argument. If they start criticizing and or attacking each on a personal level, then it becomes unacceptable.
