:::sigh::: I explained the difference already. I don't know whether you truly can't see the difference or are just pretending, so I will try again.
The difference is that one woman is being unselfish in choosing to give a child life who was unintentionally conceived. The other is selfishly choosing to purposefully conceive a child knowing she is bringing the child into a situation where one of his/her most basic needs will not be met - having a daddy.
Most conservatives believe that children inherit the physical and mental characteristics of their parents.
Yes, they inherit eye color, hair color, height, perhaps a generic level of intelligence, etc. Children learn how to choose behavior from their parents - it isn't a genetic, driving, uncontrollable force within them that causes them to do things. (That belief that behavior is uncontrollable is decidedly liberal, not conservative).
Even though the woman in today's discussion decided to raise her child alone, she at least exercised free choice in picking a sperm donor representing the characteristics she wanted.
Yes, blonde, blue-eyed little toys.
Because rape denies a woman that opportunity, most rape victims choose not to have a child who may grow up as a "bad seed."
If they truly believe that this will happen, it's only because the ignorant have convinced them (who are equally ignorant) that it will occur.
By the way, they don't have to raise the child. They can give the child up for adoption. Executing one of the innocent parties is not the answer - not even for the woman who was raped.
We can argue that it's more desirable for a child to be raised by both parents in a conventional marriage than for one parent to be missing, but you can't convince me that intentionally bearing a rape child is less of a risk than that! If you have a normal relationship with a loving family, it's easy to make sure that role models of the "missing" gender are there for your child as he/she grows up.
And I'm not arguing that all a child's intelligence and personality are inherited, only that an inescapable percentage of it is. When we marry in the conventional way, we worry over such things as the possibility that an angry streak in several of our mate's relatives represents something that may carry into your new children. At the same time, we hope that a strain of musical talent we may see in the family is something inheritable. So what, then, are the odds that someone who raped you is not bringing an assortment of ugly problems into your family tree?