The use of this kind of hyperbole is why I detest what most of these threads become, and the people who drive them into the dirt, each and every time the subject is discussed.
There is no point in using it, and you only drive the wedge in tighter and deeper.
Disgusting crap.....But then I have opinions on most everything......
And young girls who are raped, which happens every day in this country, should what? Be forced to have the baby? I don't think so.
"[A]rguing that killing the victim's child is an appropriate course of action" does not constitute an "extravagant exaggeration" of the above. I simply restated the expressed position in exact terms. The unborn is the child of the rape victim, chosing to abort that child would kill it, and the obvious abhorrence at the possible lack of a choice asserts that exercising such a choice is acceptable. So, the expressed opinion is no more, nor any less than advocating that "killing the child of the victim is...appropriate". And do please note that I did NOT say "mandatory" because that was not the position being communicated. Give me SOME credit, here.
Factually, if the girl who is raped becomes pregnant and ISN'T "forced to have the baby" -- if she can chose to have it or not -- then we are arguing implicitly that her choice NOT to have it -- that is, to kill it -- "is an appropriate course of action." So, to protest against the girl being "forced to have the baby" is a de facto argument in favor of killing the unborn child of the rape victim. Also, to argue that she MUST have a choice and MUST always chose to bear the child makes little sense. IF a choice is allowed, then the death of the unborn is, necessarily, being implicitly considered as an allowable outcome. NOT mandated, but allowable.
Please also note that I am NOT saying, in my previous post, "You believe all of these horrible things, you vile person, you." I put the questions as questions because I intended that they be considered as questions, not rhetoric, but deeply probing moral questions. Very strong questions, no doubt, but we're dealing with human life, here, the most precious of all limited resources. In this I am not condemning Peach out-of-hand; rather I am restating the stated position in barenaked form and offering it back for serious reexamination asking, "does this really, accurately reflect your beliefs? Seriously?"
What you may have perceived as a prosecutorial tone is, in fact, incredulty. That is, unfortunately, a difference that carries well only where tone-of-voice can be heard and differentiated, which is to say, not in print.
Now, what do I offer as an alternative? I offer a new life. Repudiate the perpetuation of the cycle of evil upon evil and give life to the innocent. It is a fallacy to believe that perpetrating an even greater evil is the best path to a good end. No. Out of tragedy, let there be the healing that comes from the irrepressible love of a mother for the child of her womb. Let that which began in violence and wounding, be turned into peace and healing; that, instead of death and destruction, life istelf and joy may be brought forth. Let the wounded heart truly be given "beauty for ashes"; the innocent and delicate beauty of an infant child in place of the ashes of horrible personal violation.