[Hajman]

Suppose a woman chooses, because of her reduced circumstance, to live in a high crime neighborhood, and chooses to leave the doors open while cleaning house, and is subesquently raped. Does that make the rape and subsequent issue her fault? Or does it put the unwanted child in exactly the same situation as the person in my thought-experiment who was attached by his relatives to me?

Unwanted in what fashion? Emotional? Possible. Physical/biological? Nope.

...and, assuming you think rape victims are entitled to abort...how does that situation play against the idea that the fetus being related to you gives it the rights of a citizen to be defended against murder? I assert it does not. A fetus may be "human" or "aware" or "viable" or "natural" or anything else you care to conjure up in the rights game, but it is clearly NOT a full citizen, and not necessarily entitled to a citizen's full gamut of rights, unlike the mother. When was the last time a fetus was issued a driver's license?

I don't think abortion should be done on rape. And when was it legal to murder non-citizens? It's not. A child doesn't have a driver's license. Can we kill it with impunity? Your arguments are logically weak, and not very consistent.

-The Hajman-

[donh]

I don't think abortion should be done on rape.

Really? So you think that a tramautized 13 year old should be forced to bear a fetus inside her body which is intimately connected with the most fearfully traumatic and personally invasive brutalization one could imagine? What a refined moral compass.

And when was it legal to murder non-citizens? It's not.

Really? What were we doing in Afganistan when we targeted Muhammad Omar? What were we doing when we sentenced the nazi's?

A child doesn't have a driver's license. Can we kill it with impunity?

Depends--is it still in the womb, without a connected nerve cell to it's name?

Your arguments are logically weak, and not very consistent.

You can show that by showing it. Merely claiming it is rhetorical fluff.