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

Post Reply New Topic

I'm pro-life but it does seem kind of cruel to say a girl who's raped HAS to become a mom. Though on the other hand I find the idea of killing a baby because of the circumstances they were created by appalling. What do you think?

I guess I would say abortion is acceptable in the case of rape if the girl is under 14 or so and isn't physically capable of having a baby, or if the woman is suicidal as a result of the rape because that would classify as a life-threatening situation. I hate the idea that the rapist's baby should be killed because of what their father did, to me it's a form of honor killing and most religious pro-lifers actually support abortion when it comes to rape which I find inconsistent.

I just think if it HAS to be the mother or the baby, the mother should come first. But if the girl/woman is physically and emotionally capable of having the baby, she should have it probably and if she doesn't like the baby because it reminds her of its dad, she can give it up for adoption.

So - are you asking for feedback or pronouncing? It makes a difference and a lot of query-form threads constiture manifesti.

I'm asking, and answering first. What do you think?

If she doesn't want the baby, then adoption. If she does want the baby, then keep the baby. If she wants to kill the rapist, then justifiable homicide.

I'm pro-choice (used to be pro-life) and she shouldn't be forced to keep a baby as a result of rape. However, I believe abortions should be avoided as much as possible so adoption is a better option in my opinion.

Don't worry about him, he just purposely likes being dense. Probably because it makes him look "deep" or "thought provoking".

In a hypothetical situation where abortion laws contain a 'rape exception' provision, how does the state determine that a rape occurred (thereby permitting an abortion procedure)? In the US legal system, the accused rapist is presumed innocent until found guilty by a jury. Therefore, in order for the 'rape exception' to be correctly administered, the impregnated female would have to wait until someone was convicted of raping her.

There are two reasons why this exception would not be in the interests of the rape victim. The first reason involves privacy concerns. Rape is considered to be a private matter to victims. Forcing raped women to bring a complaint to the court publicizes her rape, something they do not want. Private complaints would not work b/c it gives the court system the ability to conduct secretive trials, something that is not in the best interest of liberty.

The second reason why this exception is not in the best interest of the rape victim concerns the length of the legal proceedings. In some states it will take longer than 9 months for the police to conduct an investigation, charge a suspect, gather evidence, select a jury, hold a trial, & reach a verdict. Furthermore legal proceedings could be prolonged if the prosecution or defense makes a mistake in trial or if there is a hung jury.

The fact that such a law violates privacy concerns could take longer than 9 months to convict a rapist negates the intent that a 'rape exception' law would have (that is, allowing raped women to terminate a pregnancy). Therefore, the only possible way to guarantee that raped women can terminate their pregnancy while maintaing privacy is to allow all women the choice as to whether they want an abortion or not. Otherwise, any 'rape exception' provision to an anti-abortion law will not achieve its intent, and is merely utopian at best.

Thank you for making me look more intelligent by contrast. If I am dense, it is not done on purpose, just as I suspect this inanity of yours is involuntary.

donnie darko, I asked because it was not clear. When I start a question thread, I am seriously asking for feedback. I sometimes - usually as an afterthought - add my own ideas.

But a large percentage are saying "Is Philogos dumb?" amd meaning "Everybody knows Philologos is dumb". So - just wondered.

If that bde dumb, make the most of it.

Extinguishing life in a life form is just that.

Extinguish life in a lifeform with human DNA is killing a human.

---------
Humans [can't speak for other life forms] as a rule feel it is an undesirable thing to kill humans in most circumstances.

I do not think it is possible nor desirable to tabulate in advance all of the hypothetical cases in which killing a human might be less undesirable or even a good thing.

And there is the old Spanish proverb affirming free will.

I think it's one of those situations you'd never know how you felt unless you were put in it. I think it would put an intolerable strain on many people's relationships though.

she should abort, in the end, deep dow, i think that child would be a constant reminder of what must have been one of the most horrible times in her life.

not to think of what can happen to the child should htey find out, kids have run away for far less never to be seen again, not to mention genetics.

A girl in such a position should do what she feels best for her. Personally, I would keep it. A life is a life, and I'm not so keen on ending one unless another is in danger.

Yup, indeed. And what if the rapist wants access? The scumbag might harm her and/or the child again. If it were me, I think I'd probably push for an abortion or adoption. If the girl refused to do that, I think I'd have to think about the relationship again.

Last edited by Tequila on 29 Jul 2011, 12:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I think that there is no correct answer, and that each woman who becomes pregnant must answer the question of whether to continue with her pregnancy or not in consultation with those people whose opinions she values.

In most circumstances that would include the father. (Sometimes even in the circumstances posited by the OP--a significant number of sexual assaults are commited by assilants in pre-existing relationships with the victims). But not always.
In most circumstances that would include her physician. But not always.
In some circumstances it might involved other family members, such as her parents or siblings. But not always.
In some circumstances it might involve a member of the clergy, a counsellor, or friends. But not always.

At the end of the day, no two women are going to approach this question in the same way, and it is presumptuous of us to speculate on what a particular woman "should" do in circumstances that are unique to her.

i serously hope there is a law that prevents that, in denmark rape is only 12 or 14 years so they could get out relatively early.

as visagrunt puts it they do have the right to choose.
that being said i cannot understand why anyone would keep a child that is literally part of whomever did such things to you.
bad memories make snap reactions

Last edited by Oodain on 29 Jul 2011, 1:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I'm pro-choice.

If the girl/woman has been raped, and the rape results in pregnancy, if she doesn't want the baby then she shouldn't have to have it. She has the right to have an abortion. Even if she is "physically and emotionally capable" and doesn't want the baby, she shouldn't have to have it.

I can't imagine being forced to have sex/get pregnant (raped) and then being forced to have the baby that could result from that rape. In my mind it seems horrible beyond belief. I don't think I'd care if the baby were innocent or not, the way that baby got in there would overshadow that. I think I'd honestly kill myself before I'd have my rapist's baby.

And when it comes to abortion, in my mind the reason for the pregnancy doesn't even figure in. If a woman gets pregnant unexpectedly or by accident and doesn't want to have a baby then she has the right to have an abortion.

I'm a serious believer in birth control and sex ed in schools (which both result in fewer unplanned pregnancies and therefore fewer abortions). It would be nice if abortion was never required, but since it is sometimes, the women who need that procedure have the right to have it.

I think for any woman it would be a horrid, horrid situation to be in. No exceptions. Not only that, but to have to go through a criminal trial as well and cross-examination... you can understand why many would just decide that suicide is the better option.