Gov. orders guardian for rape victim's fetus (abortion)

ORLANDO -- Gov. Jeb Bush ordered state lawyers Tuesday to seek the appointment of a guardian for the 6-month-old fetus of a mentally disabled woman who was raped, overruling child welfare officials who said such an appointment would be illegal.

A Department of Children & Families attorney, citing earlier court decisions on abortion, had told a newspaper that the state would seek to have a guardian appointed for the woman during a Wednesday court hearing but not the fetus. The attorney had said the state would wait until birth to seek a guardian for the baby.

There is no evidence that the woman wants to either have the baby or have an abortion, but the pro-"choice" lobby is suggesting that she is being "forced" to have the baby. We do not know what she would want, either way. Given those who would speak for her, I think a guardian for the baby is called for at this stage (6 months).

Sad situation. I hope they catch the animal who raped her.

I am one pro-lifer who MIGHT have supported a very early abortion for someone like this. I do believe there are medical reasons that justify the procedure early on. (Tubal pregnancy, rape, very young victims, life-threatening situations, etc.)I never ever would support abortion for convenience.

At six months, it's beyond ridiculous--beyond "convenience" even. What is the reasoning here? She's not fit to be a parent either way, so that's not it; she will not be raising this baby. An abortion of a six month baby can hardly be less traumatic than a natural delivery of a nine-month baby, so she is not being spared anything she isn't going to have to go through anyway. The rape continues. She will continue to suffer very personal, painful invasions that she will not understand...and she can consent no more to the necessary medical ones than she could consent to the criminal one.

The article doesn't tell us if the baby is at special risk of also being retarded, but that really wouldn't influence my opinion either way. Six months is far, far, far too late, and should be too late even for people who believe in "choice." At some point, any rational person has to draw a line and say "This is human." Even Peter Singer has drawn such a line--admittedly, after birth, but he drew one. Most reasonable people would try to save a wanted baby born at 6 months gestation. How can any of the defend murdering an "unwanted" one at the same point?

I know so many people trying to adopt--if there is such a thing as an unwanted baby, it's only in the minds of abortionists.

At this point, the only people who would find a dead baby more convenient than a live one are the rapist and the abortionists.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.