I do however have a question with regard to the exception you put forth. Are you saying that an un born baby resulting from a forced incestuous rape of a minor is some how not an innocent human baby? What are you proposing it is? A demoncrat?
It's certainly an innocent human being and I'd like to see it live. But the mother had no choice in the matter, either, so the baby is an univited guest.
On the one hand, I could see how the fetus is at the complete mercy of its mother. On the other hand, it's also wrong that the fetus should pay for the crime of another. In such a case, I'd like to see support for the mother until she could bring the baby to term and is adopted. (But then all the "Who pays?" arguments spring up.) The father should pay for his crime, certainly.
Can you imagine this terrible option? What if the fate of the father is then tied to the fate of the child in some way? If the fetus is terminated, the father simply does jail time. If the baby is allowed to live, the rapist receives capital punishment.
I freely admit, I haven't thought it all through as thoroughly as even suggesting it deserves. Folks could probably poke huge holes in the argument as it stands and there's not much I could say to defend it.
...And I am also aware of the handicap folks work under if they see it Rand's way and say so on FR. I should think, however, that so long as the debate is civil, no one should be banned.