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

Post Reply New Topic

Yeah, something without limbs, brain, or even blood is not really a human being to me and it does not really have the capability to suffer either. Everyday western culture kills millions of animals that are more capable of thought and suffering than the blob of cells that is created at conception.


At the point of creation of sperm, there is a process set in place that will result in a human if nothing goes wrong for the sperm.

It does not matter.

that is the way you see it. i do not think foetus's suffer either. i do not believe they are conscious (before a certain stage of development), but i think they are eminently valuable none the less.

i was once a foetus, and so once were you. you may haughtily disclaim any "hanky panky" in your lineage, and claim "pedigree" status, but everyone alive deserves to stay alive no matter what the drama was surrounding their conception, and they would not be alive if they were terminated as foetus's.

are you the same "vexcalibur" who posts in the PPR section? i suppose you are, because no one else can use your name. you seem strangely stupid in the setting of this thread which is uncharacteristic of you in my mind.



yes i know.
that is also very wrong.



"sperm" is indeed an ingredient in the recipe to make a human, and the other ingredient is an egg. the ingredients that make a person are not (in themselves) very valuable.

i presume you allude to the "millions of lives" who never got a chance to live, because the sperm that could have generated them fell aimlessly into the dirt as their potential fathers "wanked" with no thought as to where there ejaculate would land.


i do not really like philosophical discussion, so i do not engage in it. i say what i think on a very subjective level.
that is all i have to say at this point in this thread.

@b9,

You will find that the discussions about abortion on PPR tend to de-evolve quite rapidly, with ridiculous claims being made on both sides of the argument. (ie - things like a fetus is nothing but a gelatinous blob with no inherent value, or that a fetus has brain function that would allow it to learn calculus if only it wasn't stuck in a womb without access to textbooks.) These arguments do little to foster productive discussion.

Regardless of how you would behave were you a pregnant woman, the real question comes down to this: Should any woman be forced to go through with an unwanted pregnancy?

This could be as the result of a rape (as the title of this thread asks) or of any other circumstance.

I myslef cannot imagine having an abortion (even if the pregnancy were the result of rape), unless the pregnancy put my own life at risk. However, I do not think my personal beliefs have the right to dictate what another person can do with their own body.

i do not select what i post to with regard to the sub forum it is in. my bookmark that i use to come to "wrong planet" is "recent posts", and when i arrive at the destination of the bookmark, i see all threads posted in descending order of recency since my last visit. the title of the thread is my primary lure for response, however i have learned to check whether is in "womens discussion", or "lgbt" or "ppr" before i respond about a year ago.

the devolution of the principalities of peoples assertions as threads in "ppr" descend into "ego flashing" and displays of what many participants hastily cobble together from wikipedia or other instantly available avenues of information that they present as if they already calculated it themselves, or at least as if they have known it for a long time, makes me quite unconvinced that "ppr" is "the place to be".

i understand "ppr" is an ego arena where people who are dying to show off their wits go to play.

i am not interested in that.

vexcalibur introduced fabricated motivations and backdrops surrounding what i said. i never mentioned animals, and yet he dreamed up an entire attitude that he then culpably ascribed to me to somehow suggest i implied what i did not.

it is not worth arguing with people who argue simply for the joy of arguing. they will never stop.

in my opinion, if they are having more fun doing the mental sparring than finding a correct answer to the quandary, then they are spending useless energy on their attempts at impressing others who they think will "hail" their display of wit etc etc but nothing gets damned well done. nothing gets resolved.

i am not interested whether a very smart person can throw a well thought out spanner in my works. i will acknowledge the design flaw, and account for it.

but when one argues simply because they like to, then one has to question seriously the validity of the straws they clutched at to throw at you.

whatever.




thank you for guiding my mind to the real meaning of the O.P's question.

the key word i failed to process was "force". of course no person should be forced to suffer a complete degradation of their quality of life because a criminal imposed it upon them, and the law upholds, and even enforces the damage the criminal inflicted.

i was more thinking in terms of "blaming the baby for it's fathers sins". should it be put to death?

but at the point of conception where there is no consciousness in the 4 cells that are the first stage of division, i do understand that those even 4 cells (i know pregnancy can not be detected at such an early point) are made from a recipe that is beyond the ability of anything living thing in the universe to design.

i believe it is not possible for any amount of intelligence to create true life, let alone such a complex life as the person who never lived because their mother destroyed them.

it is a dilemma.

to think of what the "abortion" could have grown up to be, and the lives it could have been integrated with, and to realize that all the happinesses and sadnesses, and every aspect of the 80 years of it's expected life will be ruled out by your decision to say "no. i want it killed", makes me squirm with insecurity . i am not morally intelligent enough to discern a clear course in my attitude pertaining to that. i need an NT to help me think about that type of question.
.

i just return to what i originally said which was if the child's gestation is detrimental to the mothers health, then the mother comes first, and she should have total decision over what she wishes to do.


but if it is a perverse moral decision as in "i do not want my child to have any genes associated with the person who gives me recurrent nightmares", then i would be disappointed at the lack of charity and fairness shown by by some, who under those circumstances, chose to terminate.

Nice.

It does sound delicious.

I realize that you were addressing Vex there, but I'm going to step in anyway since it's an open forum. I disagree that "I," and everyone else here, were ever feti. What "I" am is the complex of thoughts and perceptions localized in my brain, and that did not exist through most of my mother's pregnancy. It is, of course, true that a fetus was a necessary precondition for me to exist, but it is not true that the fetus was 'me' in any sense but that it had my DNA and later became me.



At the point* of conception, there is one cell, not four; it is true that no single consciousness is, or was, capable of laying out the blueprints in a multi-cellular organism's DNA, but it is well within the capability of blind, uncaring evolution to do so for each of the billions of species that we know of.

*"point" being a term of convenience, as fertilization and implantation are actually processes with many steps.

so were we all. But we got over it.

ruveyn

Indeed. And I highly doubt a dull spoon would be the safest option.

i think you are correct because the word "feti" does not exist. (you are pettily pedantic and i will respond to you similarly).



what you currently are is based upon the foundation of what your "original" genetic design allows for.

you may dismiss the importance of foetuses that were not you, but if you dismissed the foetus that was you in the same way, then i hope you can see the conceptual paradox. (it is (in case you can not see it) that you would not be alive to dismiss the importance of your foetal history if you abrogated your own foetal status like you seem to think is acceptable for any other foetus that is not "you" (at an early stage of development).

yes you are correct. i was hasty and tired in my description, and it is well that you alerted me to that minor flaw. (minor because i spoke about the second cellular division (which i consider the "launch pad") without any separation from the concept of conception). doyyyy.

i know that conception is at the point of fertilization of a single sex cell, but i tend to start thinking that the process is only successfully on it's way after the second division process (1,2,4), and i then believe that if all goes well, a healthy person may result from simply not intervening in the process.



yes you are correct. "blind " "uncaring" evolution produced me and the animals i love and the people i "love".

i could not have even scratched the surface of the task of providing me with a universe to live in.




"points" have to be established in observational situations, otherwise there is no reference for perspective.

i am tired of talking to you so good night,

i now have to say something to ruveyn.

so what? you got over it, the people you know got over it and i got over it as well.
i never knew i was a foetus until i learned it from a book.
i am no longer a foetus, and you are certainly distant from "foetusdom" (coinage)(do not see that as ageism,( and please do not have stroke thinking about it)).


i am "over" everything i ever saw. that is because i look down on the world that i live in.

anyway, play elsewhere ruveyn because i am not interested much in what other people think.
i think what i think, and if i agree with what i think, i stop thinking about it because i have a conclusive attitude that i can "sleep with" because i do not disagree.

i have ODD and it is highly complex. i am trying to stop it from bursting out of me.

good evening.

MONKEY, why do you always take offense when people fail to talk about fetuses in a positive or respectful tone??

Fetuses are only a good thing when the pregnancy is wanted. If the woman doesn't want to be pregnant then sorry but it is a negative thing and she shouldn't be expected to be nice about the fact that there are people who want her to carry to term against her will.

Indeed. In fact, she'd be free to hate those who want that, and wish them dead. Wishing that, with it somehow being fulfilled, would simply be self-defence.

i find it staggering to see that logic like yours is not hounded by others who are in a position to think.

do not reply because i find "replies" to be a chore to answer.
especially ones that you are likely to compile.

i have fresh sheets (that smell vaguely of laundry powder) draped on my bed (elastic perimeters) , and i am wafting off in my mind in that direction.
it is certainly the direction of least resistance.


yawn.
good night.

Especially mine? I have barely participated in this thread, so my replies being so relevant to you is surprising, to me.

You, and others thinking similarly to you, have been saying many very offensive things, towards those who would get affected by your viewpoints, so I was thinking that it's appropriate to be offensive, in return.

Goodnight. Sleep well and sweet dreams, and all that.

People can do what they want as long they're not obnoxious about it.

Last edited by MONKEY on 15 Sep 2011, 3:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.