That was the statement. Can you back it up with one factual example or just BS?
The part of that statement I disagree with is the use of the word "lots." I'm sure these situations are very rare, and are beside the point anyway because my objection to the rape exemption is that the child is brutally murdered, not that the child might be brutally murdered under false pretenses.
That was the statement. Can you back it up with one factual example or just BS?
The part of that statement I disagree with is the use of the word "lots." I'm sure these situations are very rare, and are beside the point anyway because my objection to the rape exemption is that the child is brutally murdered, not that the child might be brutally murdered under false pretenses.
That said, I'm sure I could go digging through court records and media accounts for a week and find you a bunch of proven cases. Am I willing to devote the time? No. And unless your thesis is that these situations never occur, you and I should drop this. In fact, I'm dropping it either way.
So I take it your answer is you expand your family?
Maybe. Adoption is always an option. Killing a small child is not. Tragedy hapens. The choice is whether to engage in the absolute worst possible response to the violence.