Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rape, Evolution, and "Right to Life"
self ^ | 10/18/05 | self

Posted on 10/18/2005 9:49:08 AM PDT by holeinchilada

I figure I'm about 25 degrees to the right of political center in America. Nonetheless, there's one rightwing issue which I wish I'd never heard of, which is the idea of "Right to Life". That, as far as I can tell, is the one basic issue which has kept the criminal democrat party alive over the last 35 years, and it's the one major issue which democrats come anywhere close to being on the right side of.

Not that most abortions should be happening. They shouldn't be. If the people who care about this issue were to put half the time, money, and energy into convincing people not to have abortions which they put into trying to pass draconian laws, the democrat party would die and 90% of the abortion business would probably evaporate.

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

The problem is that the whole idea of there being any such thing as a right to life involves a fundamental logical contradiction and the question of rape brings the contradiction into sharp focus.

What you're really talking about is the question of there being such a thing as a right to life which is sufficient to compell hardship and suffering on another person. In the case of rape, there's no justifying it.

Nonetheless, the law makes no distinction between born persons on the basis of how they were conceived and logically it's hard to picture there being such a distinction amongst the unform. In other words, if ANY unforn could be construed as having a right to life sufficient to compell the mother to carry it to term despite any claims she might have to the use of her own body, then you'd figure the unforn child of the rapist would have the same right.

That's the basic problem.

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.

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:

Answers in Genesis Interview with Craig Palmer

Scripps Howard News ARticle:

Rape is not, typically, the crime of male domination it has been portrayed as by sociologists and feminists in recent years, says a University of New Mexico biology professor.

Instead, UNM's Randy Thornhill and Colorado anthropologist Craig T. Palmer have developed a new theory that rape is a complex sexual crime with strong roots in human evolution.

Moreover, contend Thornhill and Palmer, rape "prevention efforts will founder until they are based on the understanding that rape evolved as a form of male reproductive behavior."

That study and others like it raise the startling possibility that by bearing a child for the benefit of a rapist, a woman encourages rapists generally and helps cause other girls and women to get raped.

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.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: abortion; crevolist; evolution; fromwhatrock; holeinhead; incomingzot; nexttimezot; notlongforthisforum; rape
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-134 next last
To: holeinchilada

WTF?


21 posted on 10/18/2005 9:58:55 AM PDT by mnehring (Cindy Sheehan- The Katy Couric of Al Jazzerra.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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

yeah...those babies NEEDED killin'! Idiot.

22 posted on 10/18/2005 9:59:31 AM PDT by pgkdan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan

Babies concieved through rape are not killed for the crimnes of the father, they are killed to keep "alive" the death industry of the left. That movement is more impoortant to them than any human life.


23 posted on 10/18/2005 9:59:53 AM PDT by Republic of Texas (Socialism Always Fails)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: balrog666
"Nice vanity. I hope it doesn't get you zotted."

What does the term Z-O-T mean?

24 posted on 10/18/2005 10:00:23 AM PDT by EnigmaticAnomaly ("“When you see a rattlesnake poised to strike, don't wait until it has struck before you crush it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

I do not support abortion in the case of rape, or incest. The only time I have even tepid support for it is if it is a medical certainty that both the mother and child will not survive child birth.


25 posted on 10/18/2005 10:01:58 AM PDT by SmoothTalker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

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

So your solution is to kill the baby? What did the baby do wrong that deserves a death sentence?
26 posted on 10/18/2005 10:02:05 AM PDT by Mulch (tm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: holeinchilada
And this is breaking news because . . . .

Incidentally, there are significant numbers of pro-lifers who support an exception for rape or incest, so your premise is false.

27 posted on 10/18/2005 10:02:05 AM PDT by colorado tanker (I can't comment on things that might come before the Court, but I can tell you my Pinochle strategy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: holeinchilada
Nonetheless, there's one rightwing issue which I wish I'd never heard of, which is the idea of "Right to Life". That, as far as I can tell, is the one basic issue which has kept the criminal democrat party alive over the last 35 years

Did you stop to think that this issue has also been responsible for the growth of the GOP in recent years? Have you seen what has happened in the South? In the Congress? Maybe you should pay attention before sitting down to write expansive political essays.

28 posted on 10/18/2005 10:02:51 AM PDT by ElkGroveDan (California bashers will be called out)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: holeinchilada

29 posted on 10/18/2005 10:03:18 AM PDT by Tax-chick ("Neither the depth of despondency nor the height of euphoria tells you how long either will last. ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: misterrob

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

So the worth of the baby depends on whether the mother wants it or not?

That seems to be the whole crux of the pro abortion crowd...that the baby is worth everything if the mother wants it and deserves all the rights we have....or is worth nothing if the mother does not want it...as if it was an appendage of the mother like a liver or kidney.


30 posted on 10/18/2005 10:04:43 AM PDT by fizziwig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: holeinchilada

draconian abortion laws needs to be abandoned

Yeah, great idea Slick! Eight year olds should be able to abort their fetus'.......Lord knows it is important to save their mother's boyfriend. I agree their should be no parental notification laws or age limits imposed on abortion. What a foolish statement!


31 posted on 10/18/2005 10:04:56 AM PDT by NVD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: holeinchilada
The issue as I see it is not the mother's right to her body or being able to rid herself of an unpleasant reminder of rape. Her rights stop where another persons rights begin and no right is more fundamental than the right to life itself.

The real issue is whether the fetus is cogniscent. Personally I do not recognize the right to life of an embryo. A fertilized egg isn't thinking or feeling any sort of pain that we would identify with. The vast majority of them don't implant in the uterus anyway and no one is the wiser. On the other hand an unborn child of 7 or more months definately does have a right to life and it doesn't matter whether it was the product of rape or not it still deserves to live.

32 posted on 10/18/2005 10:06:00 AM PDT by elmer fudd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: holeinchilada
ibtz?
33 posted on 10/18/2005 10:06:39 AM PDT by Lil'freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mulch

Some little girl gets to carry her father's daughter/granddaughter or her big brother's little bother/nephew to term?

Sorry, not buying that one.





34 posted on 10/18/2005 10:06:42 AM PDT by misterrob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: chesley
"We'll win some states, lose others"
Any state "won" would rapidly go bankrupt through skyrocketing welfare costs. Thus any "victory" would be Pyrrhic. Since the innumeracy is not among the politicians' moral failings, I doubt you'll be able to "win" ANY state.
35 posted on 10/18/2005 10:07:11 AM PDT by GSlob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: holeinchilada

Why not one for you, nunc pro tunc, since you have no right to life?


36 posted on 10/18/2005 10:07:57 AM PDT by shoknawe (It's about preserving innocent life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GSlob
Any state "won" would rapidly go bankrupt through skyrocketing welfare costs.

Better dead than poor?

Huh?

37 posted on 10/18/2005 10:10:16 AM PDT by A message ( Being a "Progressive" means never having to be truthful to yourself)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: GSlob
Any state "won" would rapidly go bankrupt through skyrocketing welfare costs.

No. In states where abortion was illegal, people would think twice before hopping in the sack, or the ones who choose to go that route would make darn sure they had contraception around.

The vast majority of abortions are a means of birth control for irresponsible, immoral people.

38 posted on 10/18/2005 10:10:19 AM PDT by ElkGroveDan (California bashers will be called out)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: misterrob
Impending death of the mother is one instance

That doesn't make it necessary. Some kind of decision is necessary in this situation - but an abortion is not necessary.

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

The whole incest exception is ridiculous.

Either the incest was consensual or it wasn't.

If it wasn't then it was rape.

I agree that carrying a rape to term would be extremely hard (although I have met women who have done so, and they are glad that they did - that they brought good out of evil), but murdering a kid because his father is evil is morally indefensible.

39 posted on 10/18/2005 10:11:09 AM PDT by wideawake (God bless our brave troops and their Commander-in-Chief)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: fizziwig

By that logic you could be called pro rape or pro incest. The fetus was not conceived by any choice of the mother, not in some drunken one night stand or with some short term guy but by violence and abomination.


40 posted on 10/18/2005 10:11:28 AM PDT by misterrob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-134 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson