Abortion in Cases of Rape or Incest? We are People, Not Arguments

Life News ^ | 6/8/14 | Rebecca Kiessling

[wagglebee]

How would like to be labeled “a hard case?” What if your class of people were systematically targeted for extinction within legislation?

What if political candidates felt quite comfortable with stating their position that you and your kind aren’t worth protecting and better off dead? What if your child was regularly stigmatized by our society?

The pro-life movement CANNOT allow for any "exceptions"!

[wagglebee]

Pro-Life Ping

[Elsie]

As soon as the perp in the incest or rape goes to prison; THEN it should be ok to KILL the offspring of that unholy union.

Who KNOWS what kind of EVIL that lovely Mary and Sarah will get into during their lives?

[Elsie]

I'd like to thank the United States Government for protecting me and my kind.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You see, 40 years ago, my odds of making it out of the egg, alive, were very poor; about 80% of us died. 

 (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=rachel-carson-silent-spring-1972-ddt-ban-birds-thrive)

 

 

But a lady discovered our plight and wrote a book that addressed our problem,

and, in 1972, a law was ammended protecting us even further. (http://www.fws.gov/midwest/eagle/protect/laws.html)

 

 

 

 

 

 

What I find strange is that the same government passed a law the very next year that allowed for killing

of unborn, and apparently unwanted, humans.  Little ones still nestled safely in their Mother's womb.

Around 25% of them are dying before birth - on average nearly 3,300 - every day of the year.

 

 

I hear that by now, somewhere around 55 MILLION of them have perished.

Wouldn't that kind of mess up the humans plans for growth, and welfare, and

retirement?

 

 

 

 

 

Strange birds; these Homo Sapiens.  Perhaps they'll come to their senses

before they are ALL dead!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'd like to thank the United States Government for protecting me and my kind.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You see, 40 years ago, my odds of making it out of the egg, alive, were very poor; about 80% of us died. 

 (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=rachel-carson-silent-spring-1972-ddt-ban-birds-thrive)

 

 

But a lady discovered our plight and wrote a book that addressed our problem,

and, in 1972, a law was ammended protecting us even further. (http://www.fws.gov/midwest/eagle/protect/laws.html)

 

 

 

 

 

 

What I find strange is that the same government passed a law the very next year that allowed for killing

of unborn, and apparently unwanted, humans.  Little ones still nestled safely in their Mother's womb.

Around 25% of them are dying before birth - on average nearly 3,300 - every day of the year.

 

 

I hear that by now, somewhere around 55 MILLION of them have perished.

Wouldn't that kind of mess up the humans plans for growth, and welfare, and

retirement?

 

 

 

 

 

Strange birds; these Homo Sapiens.  Perhaps they'll come to their senses

before they are ALL dead!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[wagglebee]

Are you being sarcastic?

[xzins]

This is not an argument for allowing abortion, so please don’t read it that way. However, in terms of the rape, incest, life of the mother position on abortion, I want to take issue with the “incest” part of that equation. It doesn’t really belong as part of the discussion.

The only incest that should matter would be if we were talking about a rape. If we’re talking about adults making a decision to copulate, then it really doesn’t matter if they’re related. It’s not like relatives are more likely to be ignorant of the facts of life.

So, if it’s willing sex between relatives, then it should be no excuse for ending a baby’s life.

If it is rape, one relative imposing him/her self on another relative, then it falls under rape and not under incest.

So, those of you who follow the rape/incest/life of mother dictum, please drop incest from the equation. Your argument really should be rape/life of mother.

[Above My Pay Grade]

This “rape and incest” argument is not a genuine one by the pro abortion side. They are being deceitful when they imply that they want to protect the unborn, but that pesky rape and incest issue prevents them. “After all, how can we force a woman who has been raped to have the child? And that is just what those “pro-life extremists” want.”

I say we need to call their bluff. Ask each pro-”choice” activist and politician if they will accept a total ban on abortions except in the case where the mother’s life is in danger and in the case of rape and incest. Write up a constitutional amendment and ask them to support it. After all, now that the rape and incest victims you so deeply “care about” are protected, all obstacles to protecting innocent, unborn children are removed.

They will, of course, reject this compromise, because they don’t give a rat’s behind about rape victims, but are only cynically using them as an excuse to make it seem like they are taking the moral high ground. “We’re not killing babies, we are protecting rape victims.”

While the pro-abortion people will never accept this, it will help us win over people in the middle, by exposing them as hypocrites and liars.

Also, while I believe all abortions (accept to save the mother’s life) are immoral, if the other side agreed to a total ban, with a rape and incest exception it would be immoral for us NOT to agree to it.

I estimate the rape and incest account for roughly 1,000 abortions per year, out of the over 1,000,000 in the US each year, which means only about 1 in 1,000 abortions from pregnancies as the result of rape.

Suppose 1,000 children were about to be murdered and we had a the ability to rescue only 999 of them and 1 would have to be left behind. Would it be more moral to let all 1,000 perish or save the 999 and, regretfully allow the 1 we could not save to die?

I also believe that if all other abortions were banned, a large majority of rape victims would choose to bring their babies to term and either raise them of give them up for adoption.

In the current environment, where over 1,000,000 women have abortions every year, mostly for convenience or economic reasons, I think it is hard to blame a rape victim for thinking she is entitled to one. After all, she has a far more compelling reason than 99% of the others.

If abortions were incredibly rare, I think rape victims would generally think differently and most would choose life. In addition, from a practical standpoint, those who wanted abortions might have difficult finding abortionists, once the all the massive profits of the abortion industry have dried up.

[Tax-chick]

I’ve made that point, as well. Incest is either rape - forcible or statutory - or it’s legal, consensual sex.

[Elsie]

ya think?

[Responsibility2nd]

Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail Responsibility2nd or wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list. FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search [ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

[maddog55]

I disagree on this one.. rape & incest I’d have to leave to the victim.

[wagglebee]

I disagree on this one.. rape & incest I’d have to leave to the victim.

Why?

Rape and incest are NON-CAPITAL crimes, why does an innocent child deserve the death penalty when the father only faces prison?

Is not the baby a victim of the same crime as the mother?

Why are the mother's wishes more important than the baby's life?

[Salvation]

What a message!

[Salvation]

No sarcasm intended -- just the truth.

Stand up for the life of unborn babies!

[Salvation]

It’s not the baby’s crime. Why should the baby be killed?

[grania]

the pro-life movement cannot allow for any exceptions

When a woman reports a rape when it occurs, won't the treatment she gets prevent most pregnancies? After that point, rape or incest should not be reasons for abortion.

If it were handled that way, rapes would ha reported when they occurred, thus cutting down on those she said-he said situations that too often happen. It would also make it more likely to prosecute those who commit rape.

[trisham]

This may be the best article about this issue that I have ever read. I can’t imagine how anyone could have a heart so hard as to be unaffected by it.

Thanks for posting it!

[Responsibility2nd]

I disagree on this one.. rape & incest I’d have to leave to the victim.

 

 

[Responsibility2nd]

Wags, a lot has gone on here in the year and a half that you were off.

Did you ever thing you would see so many pro-abort comments? Here at FR of all places?

Times have changed.

[wagglebee]

Yeah, I've got my work cut out for me.