If abortion is wrong, why is it justifiable in the case of rape?

[bigdog5994]

There is nothing morally wrong with them, but they do cost a good bit of money and force the potential/would-be parents to make a decision that could affect them emotionally for the rest of their lives, and so the intent of limiting the number of abortions would be to encourage the would-be parents and other people engaging in sex to have really thought about the impacts of whatever decision they go with, as opposed to the abortion becoming a wide-spread last resort option for irresponsible teens, which could leave them with emotional scarring and the public with a tax bill for other peoples' bad decision making.

if theres nothing morally wrong with it then why would it emotionally scar someone?

 

[El_Machinae]

Well, it's still not easy, mentally. And there's social stigma.
There's nothing wrong with accidentally having a miscarriage, but people get scarred from them too.

"He raped me your Honor!"
"Well, what were you wearing?"

That does bring up another point regarding the 'rape exception'. Now, people who're okay with a rape exception are understandably worried about whether the rape actually took place: it's an 'exception', after all.

So, if we're going to justify it, how far are we going to have to go to actually justify it? Does the woman have to lay a rape charge with the police? Does there have to be an arrest? What if the accused is acquitted?

If the woman needs to file a witness report, things get very complicated from there

 

[Atlas14]

if theres nothing morally wrong with it then why would it emotionally scar some one?

Because of human nature. People can still feel emotional attachment to losing unborn cellular entities, without morals having anything to do their feelings.

 

[capslock]

lol nice stretch

 

[bigdog5994]

Because of human nature. People can still feel emotional attachment to losing unborn cellular entities, without morals having anything to do their feelings.

why do people have emotional attachments to unborn cellular entities

 

[Atlas14]

why do people have emotional attachments to unborn cellular entities

As I said, human nature.

 

[bigdog5994]

As I said, human nature.

but not morals?

 

[Karalysia]

Socratic method fail.

 

[bigdog5994]

Socratic method fail.

i wasnt doing that

so you fail big time

 

[Karalysia]

i wasnt doing that

so you fail big time

Attempting to deconstruct the assumptions behind a persons argument through the use of questions.

 

[JerichoHill]

I cannot actively participate in this thread because it's always wrong, rape or no.

I don't see how you can justify that in the case of rape. The initial "wrong" act was of no choice of the woman involved.

 

[Lord Gay]

That does bring up another point regarding the 'rape exception'. Now, people who're okay with a rape exception are understandably worried about whether the rape actually took place: it's an 'exception', after all.

So, if we're going to justify it, how far are we going to have to go to actually justify it? Does the woman have to lay a rape charge with the police? Does there have to be an arrest? What if the accused is acquitted?

How on earth are we going to determine if the offender really wanted to rape somebody? Are we going to read his mind? Thought police! I'm completely opposed to implementing these 'thought crimes'... good grief.

 

[Bei1052]

Because there is no instance in which the law allows one to violate your rights and then makes you accountable for the product of that violation. You know... That wasn't a hard question to answer at all, and the fact that the first page is full of mind-numbingly obtuse responses boggles the mind.

Now, I have a question: If abortion is a decision to be left up to a woman and her doctor, then why do most people who consider themselves PC have no problem with the government dictating that a woman cannot have an abortion after a certain period of time?

 

[JerichoHill]

Bei,

Excellent point.

 

[Karalysia]

Because there is no instance in which the law allows one to violate your rights and then makes you accountable for the product of that violation. You know... That wasn't a hard question to answer at all, and the fact that the first page is full of mind-numbingly obtuse responses boggles the mind.

Now, I have a question: If abortion is a decision to be left up to a woman and her doctor, then why do most people who consider themselves PC have no problem with the government dictating that a woman cannot have an abortion after a certain period of time?

I do. Abortion should be legal all 3 trimesters and inclusive of partial birth abortions. The best and simplest definition for the start of life is after birth.

 

[Bei1052]

I do. Abortion should be legal all 3 trimesters and inclusive of partial birth abortions. The best and simplest definition for the start of life is after birth.

Well, at least you're honest

...And, let me say this before someone comes here and quotes some obscure case in which a woman rapes a man, gets pregnant and forces him to pay child support (I'm not even sure such an example exists): Such cases would not be the norm and would constitute the extreme.

 

[Earthling]

Now, I have a question: If abortion is a decision to be left up to a woman and her doctor, then why do most people who consider themselves PC have no problem with the government dictating that a woman cannot have an abortion after a certain period of time?

"Politically correct" isn't an actual political ideology, you're making little sense in what you're getting, unless you're trying to "blame women" as certain posters were suggesting earlier. The range of pro-life and pro-choice opinions go from people who always oppose abortion to people who still would allow late abortions, so is your question something like "why are moderates moderate" or what?

Edit: I'll leave this be but it was clarified that Bei meant "Pro-Choice" obviously changing the tone from I thought seemed like a vague "PC debate."

 

[Bei1052]

"Politically correct" isn't a political ideology, you're making little sense in what you're getting, unless you're trying to "blame women" as certain posters were suggesting earlier. The range of pro-life and pro-choice opinions go from people who always oppose abortion to people who still would allow late abortions, so is your question something like "why are moderates moderate" or what?

PC = pro-choice, not politically correct.

Edit: Anyway, what I was asking is how someone who believes that abortion is a decision to be left up to the woman and her doctor rationalizes government intrusion into that decision. Since very few people believe that a woman should be allowed to have an abortion throughout all nine months of her pregnancy, then it's evidently clear that they can't all believe the whole "the government shouldn't be involved in a woman's private medical decisions" line.

Of course, I'm assuming that all people who are PC believe this, which isn't 100% true, but I'd be willing to bet that more people who consider themselves PC believe this to be true than do those who would consider themselves PL.

 

[Earthling]

Anyway, what I was asking is how someone who believes that abortion is a decision to be left up to the woman and her doctor rationalizes government intrusions into that decision.

[citation needed]

Sorry if it sounded like your line was directed about some sort of "PC media" or something - but otherwise, it doesn't sound like you're describing the pro-choice movement at all either.

 

[Bei1052]

I'm not describing the PC movement? Then, explain to me what the PC movement is because, in my experience, I've found that the notion that the only ones who should be involved in a woman's decision to have an abortion is the woman and her doctor to be a pretty big arguing point of those who consider themselves to be PC.

(Grammatically, I'm sure that's a mess but I can't be bothered trying to fix it.)