Being pro-life isn’t the same as being psychotic, but forcing a woman to bear the child of her rapist IS.
If she chooses to bear that child, then I support that decision. If she chooses not to bear that child, then I support that decision.
So to answer your question, if a woman decides to kill the child of her rapist, yes, I’m OK with that. If the rapist wanted his child to have a fair shot in life, then he should have thought about that before he forced that child on someone who never agreed to that.
Really? NOT KILLING A BABY IS PSYCHOTIC?
That is some really twisted thinking.
So to answer your question, if a woman decides to kill the child of her rapist, yes, I’m OK with that.
So, if YOUR FATHER raped a woman it would be okay for her to kill YOU?
For what other crimes do you support killing the child of the criminal?
This is a PRO-LIFE forum and you have been pushing abortion all over this thread.
********************************
She will also be bearing her child. The child will have half her DNA, and will be carried in her body until birth.
I just wanted you to know that all pro-lifers are not like the ones attempting to label you to fit their template.
This whole discussion reminds me of something that happened not too long ago. I recall the state of Idaho, back in 1990, had a proposed law that passed in their legislature and would have banned abortion except for rape, incest, and the life of the mother. Most people in Idaho favored that law. National Right to Life, Focus on the Family, and many other pro-life groups were in strong support of this law as it would remove 98% of abortions in that state. The pro-life groups mentioned tried to encourage as many people as they could to call into the govenor’s office and encourage him to sign it into law.
It failed because the govenor, under tremendous pressure from all sides, vetoed the bill. But, that’s not all to the story. There were other “pro-life” groups who vigorously campagined against the law because it allowed for the exceptions of rape, incest, and life of the mother. Even though 98% of all abortions would have been stopped - it didn’t matter to these people.
They felt themselves “true to the cause” of the unborn. Unswerveing in their principles and saw themselves as special arbiters of the pro-life cause.
I believe that some of the blood of all those babies who could have been saved since 1990 within the state of Idaho will be on these peoples hands. Yes, the govenor made the decision, but had the voices in support of the law been louder, perhaps there would have been a different outcome. But, they worked against the proposed law and helped to bring about who knows how many innocent unborn babies deaths - all because they couldn’t get everything they wanted. And, they felt very self-righteous about it too.
Yes, I agree that the child conceived by rape should not bear the punishment the rapist deserves. I think, should abortion laws ever return to only in the cases of rape, incest, or life of the mother, that the argument NOT to abort even in those cases could be made and that many, many women would probably choose not to abort - but, to force them to do so under such circumstances is never going to be accepted by society at large.
So, I guess I just wanted to encourage you to keep on speaking truth.
Just as in the case of aborting a child to save the life of the mother, I consider abortion after rape to be an act of self defense. No, the child did nothing wrong to deserve the abortion, but the woman has done nothing wrong either. Some argue that the abortion is another wrong to add to the rape. Others may conclude that being forced to go through a pregnancy is another wrong forced onto the rape victim.
Giving the child up for adoption is another issue. The woman now has to go through life wondering about the welfare of the child, which can be torture. Others may say that she will never get over the abortion. Neither situation is one that anyone would freely choose. So, if the only choices left are horrible ones, in my mind the least we can do is to allow the party who has been hurt to make the choice and see if that may help them put some closure on the event.