A fetus has no "right to life" if it is the product of rape.

[LucyDuke]

So I was wrong about the metaphor: "waive rights" is still the wrong term. Waiving rights means deliberately relinquishing them. By contrast, this is a case of moving into a new situation, up to the limits of your rights, while retaining the same fundamental rights. The appearance of "lost rights" is created by describing those rights in non-fundamental terms.

By your way of talking, I "waive my rights" to swing my fists by walking into a crowded room. But that's not the right way to think of it. I still have the same fundamental right of freedom of movement. I just don't have the right to swing my fists all around me because I have moved myself into a new situation, moving up to the limits of my right.

Okay, that makes better sense. I think misunderstanding might've come out of my personal belief that a woman's got a right to decide what can stay in and what must leave her body at any time for any reason. I don't see any situation where she doesn't have that right, so it certainly seems to me that if she's not permitted it as a consequence of her actions, it would seem like a her actions were a waiver.

The fist-swinging, I disagree, and it might be for the same reason. You still have the right to swing your fists if you like, you're just going to run into trouble if you start infringing on the rights of other people to not be hit. I think it's just slightly different perspective, but I do see what you mean.

Yeah, you're right. Let me rephrase that. Abortion is just another form of birth control.

Okay, we could call that just making sure. Abortion is also (usually) the least socially acceptable form of birth control.

And no, I'm not suggesting that people stop having sex. But I am suggesting that people need to be more responsible, realistic, and mature when it comes to sex.

You had me worried! Aren't condoms an incredibly responsible and realistic addendum to sex? I'm not necessarily saying "free love for everyone, just wear a rubber", but any reasonable person knows people are going to do it anyway and harm reduction seems like the best approach.

What about adoption?

Adoption is nice if that's what someone wants to do. It doesn't really address the issue though.

 

[classical_hero]

I'm with you, Lucy. By saying that it's okay to abort if it was rape or incest, you instantly create a distinction between foetuses. It's the same when some people say that abortion is murder, but these people then do not condone the death penalty for women having abortions (if their country has the death penalty). It instantly makes foetuses different from human beings, since the penalty for killing a foetus is not the same as for killing a human being.

Basically, in order to be consistent with the position that all foetuses are human beings and thus have the exact same rights as human beings, you must:
a. be against ALL abortions, even in cases of incest, rape or when the life of the mother is endangered (killing a human being to protect another is not allowed unless it's self-defense)
b. be willing to prosecute women and doctors performing abortions for murder - and give them sentences equivalent to that of murdering an adult
c. whem women have a miscarriage or the pregnancy is self-aborted, prosecute them for unvolontary manslaughter - the same way you prosecute people who kill other people by accident.

I think that most pro lifers will say only those abortions that are a direct result of a life and death situation for the mother is allowable, that being, that if the mother were to die as a result of giving birth, then it is allowable to give an abortion. Abortions are serious medical procedures and as such, they should be treated as a last resort option.

out of the options, I would say that none are correct. I would not put the mother up for murder since it is more than likely that she has been pressured into this procedure, I would put those who do the procedure and those who put her under this pressure (namely "family planning" associations) up for murder and assisting murder. It is ironic that such family planing associations rarely tell of all the options available to women. The biggest one is when they are pregnant, that can give up the child for adoption, since there are many couples who are unable to have children, due to physical problems, not lifestyle problems. Also they can take some medicines that will limit the likelihood of getting pregnant in the first place. We have so many other options that there are more serious things to worry about, such as the possibility of AIDS. We never hear about that as being talked about and yet it is a very likelihood of that happening.

With regards to the OP, there are much more important issue regarding rape than if a woman might get pregnant from an attack. We should be talking about finding the rapist and castrating him so that he never strikes again. Also pregnancies involving rape are very few and far between. The most common reason for an abortion is basically that a woman was not able to keep her legs closed

 

[LucyDuke]

It is ironic that such family planing associations rarely tell of all the options available to women. The biggest one is when they are pregnant, that can give up the child for adoption, since there are many couples who are unable to have children, due to physical problems, not lifestyle problems.

Yes, they do. It's brought up before abortion. And it's not like adoption is some secret option nobody knows about. Anyway, this is about allowing or disallowing abortion in the case of rape, not whether adoption is a "nicer" alternative.

With regards to the OP, there are much more important issue regarding rape than if a woman might get pregnant from an attack. We should be talking about finding the rapist and castrating him so that he never strikes again. Also pregnancies involving rape are very few and far between.

Of course there are more important issues. If you only want to discuss more important issues, OT is not the place to be.

The most common reason for an abortion is basically that a woman was not able to keep her legs closed

That is one of the most ignorant, misogynist, unchristlike comments I've seen here. But also not really related to the topic at hand.

 

[Merkinball]

The most common reason for an abortion is basically that a woman was not able to keep her legs closed

That is one of the most ignorant, misogynist, unchristlike comments I've seen here. But also not really related to the topic at hand.

It's not mysogynist at all. Nor is it ignorant. I wouldn't even call it unchristlike. What it is, is truth. As I stated earlier, and you don't seem to be in objection to it, is that the problem isn't abortion, it's unwanted pregnancies. And you didn't seem too up in arms with the fact that abortion is just another method of birth control. Make no mistake about it, over 90% of abortions in America are because the woman couldn't keep her legs closed. Right?

Everyone says that abortion empowers women. Somehow...I've never been able to figure that one out.

But in reality, if women would unite, and just simply say "no." You wouldn't have unwanted pregnancies, nor abortion. The word "no" is...infinitely more empowering to women in America than abortion ever could be. Abortion is humiliating. I just wish that someday women in this country would stand up, take what is theres, and just start running the show. The easiest way to do that, would be to say "no." And keep their legs closed.

Aren't condoms an incredibly responsible and realistic addendum to sex?

Sure, for those that are in a position to have a responsible sex life. How often does your average sexually engaged couple have sex? What's the failure on a condom? How many abortions each year are attributed to broken condoms? Having a responsible sex life extends far beyond the ability to put on a condom like you learned in health class and your ability to buy it.

Contraceptives are great. They really are a good thing. But the fact of the matter is that unless you are willing to take on the potential responsibilities of sex, you shouldn't have sex. With or without a condom.

To me, the condom simply becomes a get out of jail free card all too often. "Well, we wore used condom. At least we tried. Let's go to the clinic now."

but any reasonable person knows people are going to do it anyway and harm reduction seems like the best approach. - Lucy

No...not really. I've been to plenty of places where...people just don't do it anyway. I've been to places where women court the same man for years before having sex. It's just a matter of social norms. Saying that people do it anyway is a cop to our dilluted, gluttonous, self infatuated society which opens up doors to all kinds of gross social problems that extend beyond a lot further than abortion. You can call me mysoginist til the cows come home, but I gotta be honest with you. Our society is full of generally abusive, manipulative, disrespectful, predatory males. And full of weak, coddled, and dehumanized women.

 

[LucyDuke]

Make no mistake about it, over 90% of abortions in America are because the woman couldn't keep her legs closed. Right?

Do you make any distinction between "the woman couldn't keep her legs closed" and "the man couldn't keep his bits in his pants"?

 

[Merkinball]

Oh hell no. Both are at equal fault. But it all just kind of circles back around to the prevailing mentality and society that makes men disrespectful and predatory towards women. And the mantra of "everybody does it anyway, so just take a condom" which makes women (particularly teenaged American girls) really weak.