Legitimate Rape and Abortion- Republicans back-pedal

[Symmetry]

Yup- this is the Akin logic. Focussing on one word out of all his nonsense might lead a person to think that this wasn't a colossal SNAFU, alas this was BS on a number of levels.

[john9blue]

can someone tell me why people who think that abortion is murder believe it's okay to have an abortion in the case of rape? are all rape victims permitted to commit one murder?

their thought process is like:

"well, abortion is a horrible crime, but since you got raped we feel kind of bad for you, and we don't want you to go through any more suffering, so we'll let you get away with it just this once"

what the actual f*ck?

if someone steals or destroys all my property and life savings, am i allowed to go hold up a convenience store and steal $100 to pay off my debts?

isn't destroying everything someone owns EVEN WORSE than raping them? and isn't stealing $100 from someone better than murdering them?

even most of the pro-life people are huge pussies about all of this. they aren't willing to fully accept their belief that abortion is murder and that it should be impermissible under ALL circumstances... because their principles aren't based on actual reasoning. meanwhile, every time i try to present a solid secular argument against abortion, everyone ignores me because they assume i'm some kind of religious nutjob.

man people are dumb

[tzor]

can someone tell me why people who think that abortion is murder believe it's okay to have an abortion in the case of rape? are all rape victims permitted to commit one murder?

The most common reason is due to a French expression normally attrributed to Voltare, "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ("Dans ses écrits, un sàge Italien Dit que le mieux est l'ennemi du bien.") As the actual occurance of abortions due to rape is small, it is foolish to have abortions performed for any reason because someone complains about abortions for those who are survivors of rape. It's a classical liberal emotional trap, which, ironically, doesn't care a wit for the actual conditions of the rape survivor.

There is also a confusion in that "rape" is often confused with "statuatory rape" and in turn confused with "incest," so there are other reasons why non viability or other general preceived phobias involving incest might apply. Mind you as most abortion centers (such as Planned Parenthood) do their utmost to conceal cases of incest and statuatory rape from actually being investigated, this is an ironic moot point.

[Woodruff]

can someone tell me why people who think that abortion is murder believe it's okay to have an abortion in the case of rape? are all rape victims permitted to commit one murder?

I'm anti-abortion (though pro-choice), and my view is that in the instance of rape it is somewhat like self-defense. While I realize the problems with that analogy (as the fetus did not rape the mother), it is similar in my mind from a "reasonability" standpoint. After all, killing in self-defense is still killing, and it's just that the law has determined that it is not murder in trying to treat the situation reasonably. I see the same situation with abortion.

And the fact is that abortion is NOT murder. Because the law determines what murder is by definition, and the law says abortion is not murder.

[Woodruff]

can someone tell me why people who think that abortion is murder believe it's okay to have an abortion in the case of rape? are all rape victims permitted to commit one murder?

The most common reason is due to a French expression normally attrributed to Voltare, "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ("Dans ses écrits, un sàge Italien Dit que le mieux est l'ennemi du bien.") As the actual occurance of abortions due to rape is small, it is foolish to have abortions performed for any reason because someone complains about abortions for those who are survivors of rape. It's a classical liberal emotional trap, which, ironically, doesn't care a wit for the actual conditions of the rape survivor.

There is also a confusion in that "rape" is often confused with "statuatory rape" and in turn confused with "incest," so there are other reasons why non viability or other general preceived phobias involving incest might apply. Mind you as most abortion centers (such as Planned Parenthood) do their utmost to conceal cases of incest and statuatory rape from actually being investigated, this is an ironic moot point.

Did you answer his question? I'm having difficulty telling if you answered it or if you just used it as an excuse for a rant.

[tzor]

And in response to Woodruff's graphic, while flotation devices are generally considered a good thing by the general public, there is a good reason to argue that american football protective gear has done more harm than good by encouraging more collisions that can cause substantial long term damage even with the use of the protective gear. Some people have argued that going back to the old leather helmits might actually reduce long term brain injuries because it would be clearer to the players not to do stupid dangerous things.

None of this has to do a wit with contraceptives, because the common conservative argument is that you should pay for your own contraceptives (just like you have to pay for your own live preservers). The last time I recall being angry at someone promoting condoms it was when Planned Parenthood was giving them out for free ... the kind that were ironicaly labled by Consumer's Union as so poor as to be worse than nothing at all (because they encouraged more behavior while maintaining an exceptionally high failure rate).

[Woodruff]

And in response to Woodruff's graphic, while flotation devices are generally considered a good thing by the general public, there is a good reason to argue that american football protective gear has done more harm than good by encouraging more collisions that can cause substantial long term damage even with the use of the protective gear.

And in the interest of fair disclosure, there is sound logic to that. Still, the analogy in the graphic does seem to fit, in my opinion.

[tzor]

Did you answer his question? I'm having difficulty telling if you answered it or if you just used it as an excuse for a rant.

Sorry Woodruff; I'll try to restate it. It is not worth loosing the battle and having abortions for any reason by the millions than to have attempted to save the few remaining 1% due to rape or incest and fail. The good of the many outweigh the needs of the few (or the one percent).

Abortion Facts

1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest; 6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child, and 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e. the child is unwanted or inconvenient).

[Woodruff]

Did you answer his question? I'm having difficulty telling if you answered it or if you just used it as an excuse for a rant.

Sorry Woodruff; I'll try to restate it. It is not worth loosing the battle and having abortions for any reason by the millions than to have attempted to save the few remaining 1% due to rape or incest and fail. The good of the many outweigh the needs of the few (or the one percent).

That seems like a self-defeating strategy, though. By denying access to abortions in the extreme and rare cases (rape, incest, etc.), you are GIVING THE CAUSE to the pro-choice crowd, in my opinion. You come across as unreasonable and if it becomes a black-and-white issue of yes-or-no, I think that the pro-choice crowd is going to win because they will have the argument of those cases to fall back on for sympathy.

By having a reasonable stance of being willing to allow them in those extreme and rare cases, you avoid the black-and-white situation, and compromise (and good policy) can occur.

As far as I am personally concerned, it doesn't matter one whit how few instances of rape/incest abortions are necessary...if there is one instance of it, then it should be allowed and if that means I am forced to decide between no abortions or all abortions, then I will make that choice for all abortions. I know I am not alone at all in that perspective.

[natty dread]

Abortion Facts

Jesus, you're like a creationist citing "facts" from answers in genesis. Maybe you'd be more credible if you tried a more neutral source...

[Lootifer]

As far as I am personally concerned, it doesn't matter one whit how few instances of rape/incest abortions are necessary...if there is one instance of it, then it should be allowed and if that means I am forced to decide between no abortions or all abortions, then I will make that choice for all abortions. I know I am not alone at all in that perspective.

Thats how I view it.

Even the most liberal among us dont view abortion as a good thing. Abortion is bad, and if it was possible to have a world where abortion didnt exist then I would welcome that world with open arms. However that isnt a reality.

[john9blue]

As far as I am personally concerned, it doesn't matter one whit how few instances of rape/incest abortions are necessary...if there is one instance of it, then it should be allowed and if that means I am forced to decide between no abortions or all abortions, then I will make that choice for all abortions. I know I am not alone at all in that perspective.

so, just to be clear, if 1% of abortions are justified, then you're willing to allow all abortions?

[Juan_Bottom]

As far as I am personally concerned, it doesn't matter one whit how few instances of rape/incest abortions are necessary...if there is one instance of it, then it should be allowed and if that means I am forced to decide between no abortions or all abortions, then I will make that choice for all abortions. I know I am not alone at all in that perspective.

Thats how I view it.

Even the most liberal among us dont view abortion as a good thing. Abortion is bad, and if it was possible to have a world where abortion didnt exist then I would welcome that world with open arms. However that isnt a reality.

Roe V Wade didn't create Abortion. A Constitutional Amendment repealing it won't stop Abortion.

[Lootifer]

As far as I am personally concerned, it doesn't matter one whit how few instances of rape/incest abortions are necessary...if there is one instance of it, then it should be allowed and if that means I am forced to decide between no abortions or all abortions, then I will make that choice for all abortions. I know I am not alone at all in that perspective.

so, just to be clear, if 1% of abortions are justified, then you're willing to allow all abortions?

I think he was referring to the binary argument: Abortions allowed vs Abortions not allowed. In which case the 1% justification would swing him.

However if the argument wasnt completely binary there would be some further discussion required as he (and I) dont think abortion is good.

I'd personally probably say yes to your question because I dont place any particular moral/ethical value on the fetus. But thats simply only my view point and I can fully understand, and in some cases agree with, the opposition; and would certainly not hugely oppose placing pretty heavy restrictions on abortions if thats what the population wanted.

I would however strongly oppose making abortion illegal for rape and incest victims.

[Juan_Bottom]

A bunch of men sitting and talking about how much and to what degree a women should be a slave to her own body. I'm so Liberal I don't even feel comfortable with this all-male panel here.

[tzor]

Jesus, you're like a creationist citing "facts" from answers in genesis. Maybe you'd be more credible if you tried a more neutral source...

FIrst of all, there is no such animal. Second of all, if the "facts" are in error, then provide the evidence. If you have none why suspect them?

[tzor]

A bunch of men sitting and talking about how much and to what degree a women should be a slave to her own body.

Gender has nothing to do with it. (If you want I can list all the pro-life women that I personally know. It's not my fault they neither play CC nor participate in this forum.) However, I will admit that eveyone in this discussion has the dubious distinction of not having been aborted (well there may be one or two but I'm going to bet that there are none). Honesty, the real people in this debate should be people who were aborted. Their opinions should carry a great weight.

...


...


Actually I was serious ... go Here for their stories.

[rdsrds2120]

can someone tell me why people who think that abortion is murder believe it's okay to have an abortion in the case of rape? are all rape victims permitted to commit one murder?

.... It's a classical liberal emotional trap....

A bunch of men sitting and talking about how much and to what degree a women should be a slave to her own body.

Gender has nothing to do with it. (If you want I can list all the pro-life women that I personally know. It's not my fault they neither play CC nor participate in this forum.) However, I will admit that eveyone in this discussion has the dubious distinction of not having been aborted (well there may be one or two but I'm going to bet that there are none). Honesty, the real people in this debate should be people who were aborted. Their opinions should carry a great weight.

...


...


Actually I was serious ... go Here for their stories.

That site was sad. I guess I'm pro-life now.

-rd

[Woodruff]

As far as I am personally concerned, it doesn't matter one whit how few instances of rape/incest abortions are necessary...if there is one instance of it, then it should be allowed and if that means I am forced to decide between no abortions or all abortions, then I will make that choice for all abortions. I know I am not alone at all in that perspective.

so, just to be clear, if 1% of abortions are justified, then you're willing to allow all abortions?

ONLY if it's a black-and-white, yes-or-no decision requirement...didn't I explain that? In fact, that was pretty much the entire point of my post there.

That's precisely the problem with the idea that "all abortions must be stopped"...it frames the argument into such a way that people like me, who are against abortion except for those extreme circumstances, are essentially required to support abortions in all cases.

[Woodruff]

As far as I am personally concerned, it doesn't matter one whit how few instances of rape/incest abortions are necessary...if there is one instance of it, then it should be allowed and if that means I am forced to decide between no abortions or all abortions, then I will make that choice for all abortions. I know I am not alone at all in that perspective.

Thats how I view it.

Even the most liberal among us dont view abortion as a good thing. Abortion is bad, and if it was possible to have a world where abortion didnt exist then I would welcome that world with open arms. However that isnt a reality.

Roe V Wade didn't create Abortion. A Constitutional Amendment repealing it won't stop Abortion.

Of course that's true. The sad thing is that most conservatives really don't give much of a shit about that, because that's those kids' problems and if they take a coat hanger to themselves, well they'll be better off dying from it anyway rather than living in sin.

[Woodruff]

A bunch of men sitting and talking about how much and to what degree a women should be a slave to her own body. I'm so Liberal I don't even feel comfortable with this all-male panel here.

The idea that a male shouldn't have an opinion on the subject of abortion really is a stupid one, to be honest, Juan. I understand that it is a woman's body, but it also is a man's progeny. It's not like men just don't care about the fetus after conception.

[john9blue]

why are we americans even allowed to have an opinion about african genocides? it's their country, and they can do what they want with it! who are we to judge?

[PLAYER57832]

why are we americans even allowed to have an opinion about african genocides? it's their country, and they can do what they want with it! who are we to judge?

That you don't want to make a distinction between a less than 3 month fetus, without sensation, etc... and with barely a 50/50 chance of becoming human, with intentional genocide in Africa speaks volumes.

There IS room for debate, but distorting facts and saying "MY morals exceed yours" is NOT debating, it is bullying.

Other people have morals, religion and can think quite well. Who gives YOU the right to tell other people what to do, particularly when it IS their own body, their own health risk, their own potential child at risk here.

[tzor]

Roe V Wade didn't create Abortion. A Constitutional Amendment repealing it won't stop Abortion.

Well, yes and no (mind you I do not support a constitutional amendment per se). Prior to Roe V Wade, this was properly a state's issue. New York, for example legalized abortion a few years before the decision. Should the decision be overturned they would still have legal abortion.

But a constitutional amendment is another matter. Being ratified by the states into constitutional law it can do practically anything it wants to do. Remember that booze was a state's issue until prohibition was briefly put into constitutional law. So a lot depends on what the amendment actually says.

[tzor]

That you don't want to make a distinction between a less than 3 month fetus, without sensation, etc... and with barely a 50/50 chance of becoming human, with intentional genocide in Africa speaks volumes.

Are we having a Biden moment Player? Where did you get that number from?

Miscarriage rates after three weeks is only 10%, never mind 3 months. Most miscarriages occur before the women even knows they are pregnant.

The nervous system does develop around the 20th week, and research shows that the fetus can experience pain at this point, but this is well beyond 3 months.

And so we compare it to "intentional genocide." In many parts of the world, abortion is the prefered form of genocide, and also gendercide.