Rape, Evolution, and "Right to Life"

self ^ | 10/18/05 | self

[misterrob]

Going, Going, Going.......

[balrog666]

Nice vanity. I hope it doesn't get you zotted.

[PaulaB]

What right that states

LIFE

LIBERTY

AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS

do people not understand?

[rhombus]

the drive for draconian abortion laws needs to be abandoned

How about some examples?

[wideawake]

There is no such thing as a necessary abortion. Morons who attack the sanctity of human life rarely possess the mind or heart adequate to understand this fact.

[adiaireton8]

No right to life? So why is it wrong to murder someone?

[mlc9852]

Huh?

[ElkGroveDan]

An article linked from Drudge recently noted that there were something like 94,635 rapes in America in 2004. In other words, the situation which highlights the problem isn't just hypothetical.

Pregnancies from rape are actually quite rare. BTW if you ever met a person who was conceived through rape, as I have, you would realize that they are regular people just like us. Why should they die for the crimes of their father?

[chesley]

You misunderstand the drive. It's for return of control to the people and the states. It's against imperial judicial aggression. Then we fight it out politically. We'll win some states, lose others. That's too bad, but the main thing is to get the courts, federal and state, out of it and leave it with the legislators, where it belongs.

[misterrob]

Impending death of the mother is one instance

I also cannot support making women carry a baby created by a rape or a teenager from an incest situation.

[MontanaBeth]

Moreover, there have been recent studies which indicate that rape itself is basically a biologically ingrained genetic survival mechanism, and not just some sort of a psychotic crime.

A "biologically ingrained genetic survival mechanism", that only occurs in a very small portion of the male population. I guess that would also explain away pedophiles. Their "genes" make them do it.

[joesnuffy]

90 Percent of abortions are basically unnecessary; nonetheless, the ones which are necessary tend to be REAL necessary.

It's hard to argue against such 'facts'

[A message]

You misunderstand the drive. It's for return of control to the people and the states. It's against imperial judicial aggression. Then we fight it out politically. We'll win some states, lose others. That's too bad, but the main thing is to get the courts, federal and state, out of it and leave it with the legislators, where it belongs.

Spot On !!!

[wideawake]

you'd figure the unforn child of the rapist would have the same right

By this brilliant reasoning, anyone alive today who is a child of rape has no rights and can be killed on sight without any moral qualms.

[holeinchilada]

>Nice vanity. I hope it doesn't get you zotted.

Thanks.

The other thought I have along such lines is that social issues generally would be better off being settled by plebescite votes than by judges who are not answerable to any political process. That would get rid of these insane wars over judicial appointments.

The basic problem is that pols no longer want to deal with social issues at all and actually prefer shunting them off to judges. In colonial times that wasn't the case since being a politician was not a profession but a short-term civic duty. A professional politician on the other hand figures that ANY vote he ever casts on such an issue is going to offend 45% of his electorate, and that any clumsy thing after that might have him out looking for another job.

[misterrob]

Non consensual sex and incest are situations where irresponsibility, inconvenience or financial hardship excuses don't apply.

[Sisku Hanne]

The number of women who actually become pregnant via rape are quite small in comparison to the toal number of abortions performed. I read that more than 85% of rape victims who become pregnant as a result of the attack DO NOT want an abortion. Being the victim of a heinous crime, they realize the baby is also an innocent victim of the situation. They inherently recognize that by aborting the baby, they are also assaulting another human life, creating two victims instead of one.

[EnigmaticAnomaly]

"The only logical conclusion I can come to from all this is that the drive for draconian abortion laws needs to be abandoned, and the effort put into peacefully convincing people not to have abortions. It's one of those areas in life in which the unintended consequences outweight anything positive you might hope to accomplish.

Oh yes, THAT will solve it. Turn a blind eye to it and abandon the unborn child instead of the laws. I still fail to see how any of this is the unborn child's fault. Rape or no rape, does the child have any rights here at all? We so conveniently overlook the rights of the unborn child in lieu of the rights of those who can assert them. The only TRULY justifiable reason for abortion is if the birth has a good chance of killing the mother.

[Stirner]

If having offspring is a benefit (especially offspring that you don't have to provide care for), then a rapist who impregnates a women gets a benefit, even if he is caught and executed. If there is any hereditary component of liklihood to rape, then the rapist's proclivities get further spread. The rapist's child is innocent, but, if it lives, the rapist "gets away with it". From a sort of big picture perspective, it makes sense for the woman (and for society) to prevent the rapist benefitting. But from a ground level, individual case perspective, it seems monstrous to kill a rapist's child (supposing it has already been born). Why does pre-birth make a difference?