I don’t question either of your commitments to the pro-life cause, but I’ve already stated my position many times, and the other point, for which both of you either refuse to see, or worse, find acceptable, that the state would forceably prevent a crime victim from any action other than carrying her rapist’s spawn to full term. That neither of you sees that a state-imposed totalitarian action to impose your personal view of morality in this action, infringing on the rights of a victim, is wrong is deeply troubling.
And for the other point, do I believe termination “solves the problem” ? It solves the punishment of carrying your rapist’s crime to term. Is it a wonderful solution ? Nope, it’s terrible. But the only thing more terrible is telling the victim, a woman, that she hasn’t the right - when she hasn’t done anything wrong to get herself in such a predicament - to decide for herself what to do.
We argue as Conservatives about individual freedom, and you take that away when you put the rights of criminal sperm ahead of a female citizen. And there’s nothing more for me to add here (other than, again, to reemphasize I oppose Roe, I think it was a horrible decision, and that abortions borne of convenience when no criminal behavior resulted in pregnancy, are utterly inexcusable).
Once again you’re using same old pro-abort argument of “imposing your morality on others.”
Protecting the baby’s life in this instance is not any more “imposing my personal view of morality” on her than protection the baby’s life in the instance where she wasn’t raped and wants the abortion would be “imposing my personal view of morality” oh her.
All laws exist to impose society’s view of morality on people. We punish murder because we believe murder is morally wrong, we punish theft because we believe thievery is morally wrong. etc.
In order to never impose morality on people we’d have to get rid of all laws.
In the end, you think asking a woman to carry the baby for 9 month even if she doesn’t want to is worse than allowing her to kill the baby. I don’t, I think killing a baby is worse, much worse.
rapist’s spawn, rights of the criminals sperm? If that is what you think of an unborn baby no matter how they came to be, then you have more problems than an argument about intrusive government.
Abortion is wrong, evil, and horrible every time. It harms the woman every time. It is almost always fatal for the baby. If the baby does survive, they are left to die.
A WOMAN HAS NO FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO ABORTION. Therefore no one is infringing upon her rights. However, humans DO have a fundamental right to LIFE.
The state is not punishing her (if they didn’t allow abortion), they are protecting the baby’s right to LIFE. ABORTION IS MURDER OF AN INNOCENT LIFE. People who argue that abortion is wrong except in the case of rape are not being consistent.
Carrying a baby isn’t a punishment. It is a natural consequence of the horrible thing that happened to her. The baby isn’t a horrible thing, the rape is. So you think the state should infringe on the right that the baby has to LIFE so that the mother can “be rid of the rapist’s spawn”. Why does this particular baby NOT have a right to Life but every other baby does? You never answered my question. Why do you oppose abortion?
Is it totalitarian to have a law against murder? Abortion is murder. A baby is a human from the time of conception, it doesn’t magically happen later. So being consistent that murder is wrong, then abortion for any reason is wrong.