Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: pissant

These groups have won many battles, only because Conservatives have allowed them to frame the terms of battle and allowed them to fight within the constructs of their own paradigm.

There is no such thing as pro-choice or anti-choice. There are only pro-abortionists and pro-lifers. If Palin were to make an exception in the case of rape or incest, she would be a hypocrite. A life is a life and if you are pro-life, I am not sure how you can make a distinction in one innocent from another.

As horrible as the crimes of rape and incest are, I am just not sure how destroying two innocents makes things any better. I know well, this is all easier written than lived, nor do I intend to seem callous in my observations. I can only imagine how someone would feel to be pregnant as a result of rape or incest.

I think what is truly callous is thinking that removing the “offending tissue” is the solution. If women do not want to become pregnant, they make many choices or pass up many before doing so. The exception here is in the case of rape or incest. Sarah Palin has not chosen the most politically expedient position to be sure. It is my opinion, however, the right position.


22 posted on 09/05/2008 12:16:26 PM PDT by WildcatClan (The world is full of fatheads; so I invented Diet Shampoo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: WildcatClan

I disagree. Prolifers such as me who would allow a rape exception, are squarely allied with those who would not. It will be a fine day if we are left arguing this detail after Roe v. Wade is overturned and/or abortion is made illegal.


27 posted on 09/05/2008 12:25:26 PM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

To: WildcatClan
There are only pro-abortionists and pro-lifers. If Palin were to make an exception in the case of rape or incest, she would be a hypocrite.

If we could discourage even 10% of abortions in the coming year, that would be a good thing. Even if it meant that 90% of abortions went on as planned, that would still be better than 100%.

There are some reasonable practical and moral arguments for and against abortion in the case of rape or incest (e.g. should a rapist be allowed to profit from his crime by perpetuating his genes to the next generation). An argument that I have not seen mentioned is the increased risk of false rape accusations. A woman who consents to have sex may retroactively withdraw that consent if she finds herself pregnant and a rape accusation becomes the key to getting an abortion.

Still, if someone wants to end 99% of abortions, I'd rather go along with that and worry about the other 1% later than argue with them about the other 1% while doing nothing.

49 posted on 09/05/2008 4:27:32 PM PDT by supercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

To: WildcatClan
These groups have won many battles, only because Conservatives have allowed them to frame the terms of battle and allowed them to fight within the constructs of their own paradigm.

Bears repeating. It's the same with pederasty. Once you've uttered the word 'gay', you've lost whatever argument you're going to present. Who's against gaiety, who's against choice and who's against social justice (whatever that means). Whoever controls the language controls the debate, and so far, McCain and Palin are doing well in this department.

56 posted on 09/05/2008 7:27:38 PM PDT by Revolting cat! (Are you ready to pray for Teddy?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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