LOGO
General Discussion Undecided where to post - do it here.

Reply to Thread New Thread
Old 05-17-2012, 06:28 PM   #1
Tic Tac Took

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
568
Senior Member
Default How would a rape/incest exception be implemented?
From a pro-life perspective, how can one morally support an exception on any grounds other than life of the mother?
Tic Tac Took is offline


Old 05-17-2012, 06:37 PM   #2
Tij84ye

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
327
Senior Member
Default
There obviously isn't a practical way to do it. By the time someone has been put on trial for rape and a verdict has been reached, it's probably too late to get an abortion. Which, of course, shows that the anti-choice crowd is perfectly okay with having a woman be impregnated against her will and then forced by the state to serve the interests of a fetus for nine months. These are generally the same people who think it's SLAVERY to tax someone to pay for universal healthcare.
Tij84ye is offline


Old 05-17-2012, 06:40 PM   #3
orgagsUpsepsy

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
446
Senior Member
Default
There obviously isn't a practical way to do it. By the time someone has been put on trial for rape and a verdict has been reached, it's probably too late to get an abortion. Which, of course, shows that the anti-choice crowd is perfectly okay with having a woman be impregnated against her will and then forced by the state to serve the interests of a fetus for nine months. These are generally the same people who think it's SLAVERY to tax someone to pay for universal healthcare.
This is a favorite talking point of the left but isn't actually true. The pro-life movement cuts deeply across political boundaries.

The pro-life movement is far more intellectually honest than the pro-choice movement, which almost never admits that the real question is "when does moral personhood begin", and constantly hides behind morally despicable objections like "but what about the victims of rape or incest?"

Anyone who thinks the pro-life position can be objected to on the grounds of its impact on rape victims is a bad person and should be ashamed.

The strict pro-life position's only problem - and to be fair this is a large one - is that their metaphysics are ridiculous. But having a confused metaphysics doesn't usually make you a bad person.
orgagsUpsepsy is offline


Old 05-17-2012, 06:47 PM   #4
hiedeemom

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
462
Senior Member
Default
I have no problem taking the woman's word for it.
hiedeemom is offline


Old 05-17-2012, 06:56 PM   #5
Filling25

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
425
Senior Member
Default
Again, now you're talking legal proceedings.

The presence (or absence, for that matter) of semen does not prove (or disprove) rape.

From the perspective of a medical exam, a woman who was raped typically looks no different from any other woman.
Filling25 is offline


Old 05-17-2012, 07:01 PM   #6
massons

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
383
Senior Member
Default
If someone doesn't think an embryo is a person then forcing a rape victim to keep it seems deeply wrong. Hardly moreso than forcing anyone to keep it! Else you think it is right and just that the punishment for unprotected sex is to spend nine months with a debilitating illness that takes over your entire life and has permanent physiological effects.

People who find the "rape or incest" example convincing have a ****ed up value system.
massons is offline


Old 05-17-2012, 07:09 PM   #7
newpiknicker

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
460
Senior Member
Default
.
newpiknicker is offline


Old 05-17-2012, 07:10 PM   #8
buyviagraonlineusatoday

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
499
Senior Member
Default
While I understand and appreciate the point Kuci is trying to make, it does seem to belittle the issue of rape. It is far more common than most people think--every single person in this thread knows someone who has been raped, I guarantee it. You may not know that you do, but you do.
I'm sorry to hear that, Guy.

If the only way to get an abortion is by a "rape or incest" exemption, how much do you want to bet rape accusations would skyrocket?
buyviagraonlineusatoday is offline


Old 05-17-2012, 07:14 PM   #9
soajerwaradaY

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
447
Senior Member
Default
There are parts of the world where rape victims are killed by their families in order to mitigate the dishonor of the rape. Here in the west, we kill the innocent fetus in order to mitigate the dishonor of the rape. Is that what people consider progress?

The sad fact is that you can be convicted of rape and serve between five and ten years, but if your father was a rapist you can be killed for it. What kind of ******* would defend such a system?
soajerwaradaY is offline


Old 05-17-2012, 07:18 PM   #10
Viyzarei

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
404
Senior Member
Default
There are parts of the world where rape victims are killed by their families in order to mitigate the dishonor of the rape. Here in the west, we kill the innocent fetus in order to mitigate the dishonor of the rape. Is that what people consider progress?

The sad fact is that you can be convicted of rape and serve between five and ten years, but if your father was a rapist you can be killed for it. What kind of ******* would defend such a system?
An ******* that understands that an early-development fetus is not a person.
Viyzarei is offline


Old 05-17-2012, 07:21 PM   #11
weluvjessicaalba

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
380
Senior Member
Default
I'm sorry to hear that, Guy.
Erm... not sure, but I get the impression that I gave you the impression that I was raped. Which is false, and I apologize if that is the case.

I meant everyone here knows a woman who has been raped.
weluvjessicaalba is offline


Old 05-17-2012, 07:25 PM   #12
sobre

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
382
Senior Member
Default
Not quite. I'm saying that if you think abortion is murder, then rape or incest shouldn't enter the equation - the evil of forcing a rape victim to bear the child is bad, but much less so than murder. If you think abortion is just a normal medical procedure without ethical implications, then it is already incredibly cruel to deny it to non-rape victims. If only the additional cruelty of denying it to rape victims convinces you, that's bad.
Gotcha. Mea culpa.

As to the OP, it is, quite simply, a logistical nightmare, and completely untenable.
sobre is offline


Old 05-17-2012, 07:36 PM   #13
EasyLOAD

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
567
Senior Member
Default
An ******* that understands that an early-development fetus is not a person.
Personhood is a legal status, and is subject to change.
EasyLOAD is offline


Old 05-17-2012, 07:43 PM   #14
irresseni

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
410
Senior Member
Default
If the only way to get an abortion is by a "rape or incest" exemption, how much do you want to bet rape accusations would skyrocket?
Yeah, that's what I'm saying. If you made a police report mandatory, it would at least discourage those who weren't raped, but it would also likely discourage a large percentage (possibly even a majority) of those who were. And after a while, false reports would simply clog up the system, because the exception would give women a big perverse incentive and the police wouldn't have the resources, or even the hypothetical ability, to get to the bottom of every lie. A large number of real rapes boil down to he-said she-said. The ironic result might be to decrease the likelihood of rape victims getting justice.

If the law doesn't get involved, you're going to see thousands reporting rapes, but only at a clinic, and a substantial number of doctors will sigh, throw up their hands and say "**** it, let's just do this" regardless of how they feel about the procedure.
irresseni is offline


Old 05-17-2012, 07:45 PM   #15
ffdfriendforurr

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
517
Senior Member
Default
Another thing, rape camps would not need to have on-site behavioral experts. They could just be video feeds to a centralized rape camp in D.C. or something. 95% of lie detection can be done via video.
ffdfriendforurr is offline


Old 05-17-2012, 08:02 PM   #16
vqIo7X2U

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
445
Senior Member
Default
There are generally medical signs indicating rape. As a pro-lifer, I support it.
Quoted for posterity.
vqIo7X2U is offline


Old 05-17-2012, 08:05 PM   #17
tmobmobfil

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
470
Senior Member
Default
Viva le Wiggy.
tmobmobfil is offline


Old 05-17-2012, 08:26 PM   #18
CaseyFronczekHomie

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
398
Senior Member
Default
Both of those are philosophical questions -- something the government is ill-equipped to deal with.

And BTW, it was the Supreme Court that granted corporate personhood. Interesting that the right didn't complain about activist judges when this heavy-handed ruling -- far beyond the scope of the root case -- came down. Chief Justice Roberts seems to have been the driving force.

But I digress.
CaseyFronczekHomie is offline


Old 05-17-2012, 08:35 PM   #19
Enjoymmsq

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
380
Senior Member
Default
Well, that didn't take long. Can anybody think of a feasible way to enforce the exception? And, if not, would you expect to see a rather large increase in the number of reported rapes (but only reported at doctors' offices where abortion is provided, not to the police)? Because, if the exception is a giant, easily exploited loophole a significant number of people would be comfortable exploiting, the whole argument over whether or not there should be an exception is pretty well moot.

Again, that's leaving aside the fact that it doesn't make sense except as a compromise anyway.
For incest, you can take a tissue sample in utero and do a paternity test.

For rape, having reported the the rape at the time isn't perfect, but it's a start.
Enjoymmsq is offline


Old 05-17-2012, 08:41 PM   #20
DurryVony

Join Date
Nov 2005
Posts
595
Senior Member
Default
Both of those are philosophical questions -- something the government is ill-equipped to deal with.

And BTW, it was the Supreme Court that granted corporate personhood. Interesting that the right didn't complain about activist judges when this heavy-handed ruling -- far beyond the scope of the root case -- came down. Chief Justice Roberts seems to have been the driving force.

But I digress.
Corporate personhood evolved out of several cases in the 19th century. Roberts had nothing to do with it.
DurryVony is offline



Reply to Thread New Thread

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:22 AM.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Design & Developed by Amodity.com
Copyright© Amodity