Rape does not justify abortion

[The Rabbi]

People do not have souls, people are souls.

Prove it...

Do you honestly think I can't?

And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

The word translated as soul in this verse is nephesh, which means breathing creature. I am sure you are willing to admit that people are living, and breathing, creatures. That makes people souls.

If you are honest you will rep me for this one since I just used the Bible to prove something science agrees with.

Hebrew has several words for soul. The Torah often uses the word "nefesh" to designate person, by metonymy.

 

[Noomi]

We all have a right to life, even if you don't believe that rights come from the government the right to life is written into the constitution.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

If the purpose of government is to protect the rights of those who cannot defend themselves because no one is less capable of defending their rights than an unborn child. Rape is a horrific crime, we all know that, but it does not justify anyone taking away the rights of an innocent person.

Your argument fails in the first two words - a person. A fetus is not a person.

 

[The Rabbi]

We all have a right to life, even if you don't believe that rights come from the government the right to life is written into the constitution.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

If the purpose of government is to protect the rights of those who cannot defend themselves because no one is less capable of defending their rights than an unborn child. Rape is a horrific crime, we all know that, but it does not justify anyone taking away the rights of an innocent person.

Your argument fails in the first two words - a person. A fetus is not a person.

Of course it is. If it isnt a person, what is it?

 

[Noomi]

We all have a right to life, even if you don't believe that rights come from the government the right to life is written into the constitution.



If the purpose of government is to protect the rights of those who cannot defend themselves because no one is less capable of defending their rights than an unborn child. Rape is a horrific crime, we all know that, but it does not justify anyone taking away the rights of an innocent person.

Your argument fails in the first two words - a person. A fetus is not a person.

Of course it is. If it isnt a person, what is it?

A human fetus. I don't make the law, I am telling you what the law says. If a fetus is a person under your laws, then why is abortion legal?

 

[Ravi]

They are unrelated.

By the way, did you know that the entitlement system you support depends on population growth that has been decimated by abortion?

They are very related.

You stated:

We all have a right to life, even if you don't believe that rights come from the government the right to life is written into the constitution.

A right to life extends to everyone, as you said, that MUST logically include the born as well as the unborn, or you cant use the phrase "We ALL".

So if WE ALL have a right to life as you stated, then as a lack of access to health care equals death, then you must logically support universal health care for all. And if you believe, as you stated, that its written into the Constitution, it is therefore a right provided for by government, its a civil right and one that must be protected by the government.

If you do not, then you do not believe that we all have a right to life and your entire argument is false.

A right to life does not imply a right to health care because health care is a service.

So is incubation.

 

[The Rabbi]

Your argument fails in the first two words - a person. A fetus is not a person.

Of course it is. If it isnt a person, what is it?

A human fetus. I don't make the law, I am telling you what the law says. If a fetus is a person under your laws, then why is abortion legal?

If a fetus is not a human then why is someone who causes the fetus to abort considered a murderer? The only exception is someone performing an abortion with the mother's consent.
Again if it isnt a person, what is it?

 

[Noomi]

Of course it is. If it isnt a person, what is it?

A human fetus. I don't make the law, I am telling you what the law says. If a fetus is a person under your laws, then why is abortion legal?

If a fetus is not a human then why is someone who causes the fetus to abort considered a murderer? The only exception is someone performing an abortion with the mother's consent.
Again if it isnt a person, what is it?

Someone who causes a fetus to abort is not a murderer. Abortion is legal.

Again, it is a human fetus. Not a person, according to the law. Because if it was, you would have to drag every woman who suffered a miscarriage through the ordeal of an exam to ensure she didn't abort...although I am sure the cons would practically get an erection at the thought of that.

 

[Greenbeard]

I did not argue the constitution, I pointed out that the constitution actually proves we have a right to life.

The Constitution protects a person (which a fetus is not) from being executed by the state without due process. It says nothing about personal medical decisions made by a private citizen seeking services from a private medical provider.

 

[jillian]

I did not argue the constitution, I pointed out that the constitution actually proves we have a right to life. That right does not come from the constitution anymore than my ability to type does. The constitution does not protect Roe anymore than it protects slavery, the court used the constitution, and some seriously dubious logic, to justify abortion.

You quoted the Constitution to support your opinion. I used the Constitution to support mine.


Stalemate. The rest is only opinion.

You did not quote the constitution, you cited a Supreme Court decision.

and that decision is binding law as much as the document is....

 

[jillian]

Indeed. This is why many pro lifers speak up.

I was once an embryo, so was my son, you, jillian and everyone here that is speaking out, their voices are being heard.

While some may not have had great mothers, great lives, at least they were given a chance at life.

and some of us wouldn't be alive but for reproductive choice.

and some of us wouldn't have had very wanted children via in vitro or other means if the radical right's 'personhood' laws were in effect.

for the upteenth time... no one is wise enough to make moral choices for others. so those choices should be left between the woman and her doctor.

we are not idiots who can't make decisions but for the dictates of a bunch of religious extremists who think they're more moral than the rest of us.

Abortion helps people get born? How?

By the way, I am not making moral choice for others, I am attempting to prevent people from making immoral choices to kill others.

i don't think it's immoral. i think it's immoral to force a woman to have a child she doesn't want. i think it's immoral to then say that she's on her own and you don't support any type of daycare, education assistance and job training for her. i think it's immoral to make a woman have a child who might look like the person who raped her. i think it's immoral to let a woman die because you won't terminate a pregnancy that is killing her.

 

[jillian]

Roe v. Wade.

A woman does not need to justify anything to obtain an abortion. It is her body and she has absolute rights over her body.

they hate that.

Just imagine what the millions of slaughtered children might have to say about it had their lives and voices not been ripped apart.

there are no slaughtered children.

when you eat an omelette, are you eating a chicken?

we terminate life all the time. when we eat...when we kill a bug... when we wear leather.... that is all 'life'. the only question is when that life is deserving of protection. i have a picture of my son at 8 cells.... and at 8 weeks... and at 8 months.... when i knew he looked like a boy and i knew he had my jaw.

valuing a potential life over a woman's life is immoral. and my religious beliefs don't dictate such draconian point of view. and i certainly don't want your religion or anyone else's religion dictating my life view.

at some point between 8 cells and 8 months, the government's interest in protecting him outweighed my own. but it wasn't at 8 cells.

when that governmental interest kicks in is the ONLY consideration that should be part of this debate... which is really a religious debate and not a political one. in fact, it has no business being a political debate. and that question was answered by roe v wade.

80% of anti-choice activists are men.

why do you think that is?

 

[FA_Q2]

I have to say that the point in the OP has been somewhat lost.

Rape, in no way shape or form, can justify an abortion. The idea is silly. You have a right to life UNLESS you were conceived in such and such manner. The idea that there are people that want to ban abortion but leave an exemption for rape is asinine on its face. This, however, has nothing to do with the legality of abortion in any sense of the matter either.

The idea that a woman has an inherent right to abort at any time is asinine as well and it is illegal in many places right now. There is no one challenging most of those laws because they are fair and reasonable. The concept that life should get rights at conception (because weather or not you want to admit it, it is SCIENTIFIC FACT that life does begin at conception) is no more crazy than the idea that life does not get any rights till it is born. There is nothing that is inherently different from a baby at +1 second than there is with a baby at -10 seconds. There is a line to be drawn and despite all the naysaying that the state does not have a say in this matter, it clearly does. Not only does it have a say, it exercises that say right now in current law.

Abortion should not be illegal. Abortion should not be legal under any and all circumstances either. There should be fairly clear ‘time’ requirements. The interesting thing is that it certainly seems the VAST majority of people understand this and agree. I have not really met anyone that actually backs legal, late term abortions as I have not really met anyone that really wants to make abortion illegal. The unborn should, and do, have some rights.

 

[The Rabbi]

A human fetus. I don't make the law, I am telling you what the law says. If a fetus is a person under your laws, then why is abortion legal?

If a fetus is not a human then why is someone who causes the fetus to abort considered a murderer? The only exception is someone performing an abortion with the mother's consent.
Again if it isnt a person, what is it?

Someone who causes a fetus to abort is not a murderer. Abortion is legal.

Again, it is a human fetus. Not a person, according to the law. Because if it was, you would have to drag every woman who suffered a miscarriage through the ordeal of an exam to ensure she didn't abort...although I am sure the cons would practically get an erection at the thought of that.

That is wrong. If a pregnant woman is crossing the street and I negligently hit her with my car and she loses the baby, I will be charged with manslaughter.

 

[The Rabbi]

and some of us wouldn't be alive but for reproductive choice.

and some of us wouldn't have had very wanted children via in vitro or other means if the radical right's 'personhood' laws were in effect.

for the upteenth time... no one is wise enough to make moral choices for others. so those choices should be left between the woman and her doctor.

we are not idiots who can't make decisions but for the dictates of a bunch of religious extremists who think they're more moral than the rest of us.

Abortion helps people get born? How?

By the way, I am not making moral choice for others, I am attempting to prevent people from making immoral choices to kill others.

i don't think it's immoral. i think it's immoral to force a woman to have a child she doesn't want. i think it's immoral to then say that she's on her own and you don't support any type of daycare, education assistance and job training for her. i think it's immoral to make a woman have a child who might look like the person who raped her. i think it's immoral to let a woman die because you won't terminate a pregnancy that is killing her.

Me Me Me. It's all the Left ever thinks about.

 

[Liability]

The basic issue IMHO is when the right to life starts; do we want to allow the termination of life prior to birth? 10 minutes prior? 10 days? 10 weeks? At conception? At what point should our society confer that most basic right: to life.

And then there's this - if you decide that the right to life begins at conception, then why should the circumstances of the conception influence the decision? Should we deny the right to life for a fetus based on those curcumstances? Where's the justice in that? The fetus is terminated due to events beyond it's control?

I understand the injustice of rape or incest, no question the victim already has to deal with a great deal of pain without an unwanted pregnancy as a reminder. But is that worse than terminating a life, even if an unborn one? Not an easy decision.

I think it oughta be a local or state decision for now, rather than a federal law or using federal funds. But thast's just me.

The whole OP is a none issue.


There is no ....need.... for any justification.... to anyone at all for having an abortion.

Wrong.

The requirement for a justification to take a human life ALWAYS exists.

 

[HUGGY]

I have to say that the point in the OP has been somewhat lost.

Rape, in no way shape or form, can justify an abortion. The idea is silly. You have a right to life UNLESS you were conceived in such and such manner. The idea that there are people that want to ban abortion but leave an exemption for rape is asinine on its face. This, however, has nothing to do with the legality of abortion in any sense of the matter either.

The idea that a woman has an inherent right to abort at any time is asinine as well and it is illegal in many places right now. There is no one challenging most of those laws because they are fair and reasonable. The concept that life should get rights at conception (because weather or not you want to admit it, it is SCIENTIFIC FACT that life does begin at conception) is no more crazy than the idea that life does not get any rights till it is born. There is nothing that is inherently different from a baby at +1 second than there is with a baby at -10 seconds. There is a line to be drawn and despite all the naysaying that the state does not have a say in this matter, it clearly does. Not only does it have a say, it exercises that say right now in current law.

Abortion should not be illegal. Abortion should not be legal under any and all circumstances either. There should be fairly clear ‘time’ requirements. The interesting thing is that it certainly seems the VAST majority of people understand this and agree. I have not really met anyone that actually backs legal, late term abortions as I have not really met anyone that really wants to make abortion illegal. The unborn should, and do, have some rights.

I have to say that the point in the OP has been somewhat lost.


The only thing "losing" is yours and religions tired old mantra that people like you should have a say in the personal choices women make with their bodies. You do not have a say thanks to the peoples right to elect representatives that appointed and confirmed a supreme court which upheld a womans right to privacy. Rape just puts a finer point on it. We are not going backward to a time when zealots like yourself could stone a woman to death for even THINKING she had the right to choose. Babies are not dying because of abortion. Your religion is. Thank GAAAWWWDDDD!!

 

[Borillar]

Abortion helps people get born? How?

By the way, I am not making moral choice for others, I am attempting to prevent people from making immoral choices to kill others.

i don't think it's immoral. i think it's immoral to force a woman to have a child she doesn't want. i think it's immoral to then say that she's on her own and you don't support any type of daycare, education assistance and job training for her. i think it's immoral to make a woman have a child who might look like the person who raped her. i think it's immoral to let a woman die because you won't terminate a pregnancy that is killing her.

Me Me Me. It's all the Left ever thinks about.

It is true that the left cares more about individual liberties than the right does. On the other hand, me me me seems to be the only thing the right cares about when it comes to gun control, health care, taxes, and other issues.

Women have privacy rights. It is backed up by the 9th 10th and 14th amendments. You don't like it? Don't get an abortion then.

 

[The Rabbi]

i don't think it's immoral. i think it's immoral to force a woman to have a child she doesn't want. i think it's immoral to then say that she's on her own and you don't support any type of daycare, education assistance and job training for her. i think it's immoral to make a woman have a child who might look like the person who raped her. i think it's immoral to let a woman die because you won't terminate a pregnancy that is killing her.

Me Me Me. It's all the Left ever thinks about.

It is true that the left cares more about individual liberties than the right does. On the other hand, me me me seems to be the only thing the right cares about when it comes to gun control, health care, taxes, and other issues.

Women have privacy rights. It is backed up by the 9th 10th and 14th amendments. You don't like it? Don't get an abortion then.

Women do not have more rights than men.
If a woman wanted a hysterectomy I would say it's no one's business. But an abortion ends a human life. So it isn't just her business anymore.

 

[Katzndogz]

Abortion in the case of rape occupies the same position as a woman who shoots her attacker but misses and hits an innocent bystander. It's awful, terrible, shouldn't happen, but we understand the motivations. Legally if a woman did shoot an attacker and hit a bystander, the attacker would be tried for murder. There is no reason why the same sense of proportion should not be applied to abortion. Charge the rapist for the murder of the unborn child.

Very few, rarely is an abortion the result of rape. Normally abortion is the result of carelessness, thoughtlessness and the same lack of regard for life as drunk driving. Women get pregnant because they simply don't want to be bothered either taking care of themselves or using protection. Even using contraception is an imposition on the freedom of women to do what they wish with their bodies. And they should. Except they want someone else, anyone else, to experience the consequences of their behavior besides them.

 

[Ravi]

Abortion in the case of rape occupies the same position as a woman who shoots her attacker but misses and hits an innocent bystander. It's awful, terrible, shouldn't happen, but we understand the motivations. Legally if a woman did shoot an attacker and hit a bystander, the attacker would be tried for murder. There is no reason why the same sense of proportion should not be applied to abortion. Charge the rapist for the murder of the unborn child.

Very few, rarely is an abortion the result of rape. Normally abortion is the result of carelessness, thoughtlessness and the same lack of regard for life as drunk driving. Women get pregnant because they simply don't want to be bothered either taking care of themselves or using protection. Even using contraception is an imposition on the freedom of women to do what they wish with their bodies. And they should. Except they want someone else, anyone else, to experience the consequences of their behavior besides them.

Right....pregnancy is never the fault of the man.