I do not believe the A, B, or C statements that you have listed. I do believe that it is not conducive to honest debate to insult and mischaracterize speakers who do not feel that they have enough evidence to come to conclusions. I work in a field where we must deal in provable facts; there is no need to feel hostile or threatened. I, and I think the others — all the others — just want to be certain of facts. One person’s story, no matter how emotionally compelling, is just that: one person’s story. It may or may not be entirely true.
Then why doubt this woman's story?
I do believe that it is not conducive to honest debate to insult and mischaracterize speakers who do not feel that they have enough evidence to come to conclusions.
Let's go back to what Age of Reason said in post 17:
If she didn’t abort the rapist’s kid, then it wasn’t rape.
How is that a "mischaracterization" and how is it not a conclusion?
I work in a field where we must deal in provable facts;
Okay, let's assume that a woman is cheating on her spouse, why have a rape kit done one month BEFORE discovering she was a month pregnant?
One person’s story, no matter how emotionally compelling, is just that: one person’s story. It may or may not be entirely true.
Again, can you give a single reason why a woman would cheat on her husband, have a rape kid done and then GO PUBLIC with the story? Call me skeptical but that scenario carries a lot of risk and no benefit.
I will ask again, do you believe that the pro-life movement is somehow so unscrupulous that they would fabricate a story about a baby conceived in rape? A simple YES or NO will suffice.