• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Life of Mother, Rape

Media_Truth

Media_Truth

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 31, 2016
Messages
11,375
Reaction score
2,650
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Let me first say that I don't believe in abortion as a form of birth control. Surely, partners in sex can get more creative with their birth control choices. That said, if a doctor told me that my wife would probably die while giving birth, I would encourage her to abort the child. Likewise, if my daughter was raped and impregnated, I would respect her decision to bear the child or abort.
 
Media_Truth said:
Let me first say that I don't believe in abortion as a form of birth control. Surely, partners in sex can get more creative with their birth control choices. That said, [1.] if a doctor told me that my wife would probably die while giving birth, I would encourage her to abort the child. Likewise, [2.] if my daughter was raped and impregnated, I would respect her decision to bear the child or abort.
Click to expand...

The "Life of the Mother" exception is already accepted by most Pro-Life advocates.

Your second exception is problematic; both for many Pro-Life advocates and for your stance in seeming opposition to Pro-Choice.

In the eyes of Pro-Life, it is not the baby's fault that it was conceived in violence. It is considered a wholly innocent victim of that act and is still a precious life worth preserving for it's own sake.

On the Pro-Choice side, if you can allow your own child the right to decide whether to keep the baby or abort it (albeit qualified by your "rape exception" scenario), then you are still allowing for choice based on her concerns of whether or not she can cope with having and raising it.

It is not so far a step to allow any woman this choice on the basis of her own concerns about whether she can cope with raising one or not.

Essentially, once you open the door to "exceptions" which allow the woman to choose absent a life or death situation then it is hypocritical to say "my exceptions but not yours."
 
Last edited:
Captain Adverse said:
The "Life of the Mother" exception is already accepted by most Pro-Life advocates.

Your second exception is problematic; both for many Pro-Life advocates and for your stance in seeming opposition to Pro-Choice.

In the eyes of Pro-Life, it is not the baby's fault that it was conceived in violence. It is considered a wholly innocent victim of that act and is still a precious life worth preserving for it's own sake.

On the Pro-Choice side, if you can allow your own child the right to decide whether to keep the baby or abort it (albeit qualified by your "rape exception" scenario), then you are still allowing for choice based on her concerns of whether or not she can cope with having and raising it.

It is not so far a step to allow any woman this choice on the basis of her own concerns about whether she can cope with raising one or not.

Essentially, once you open the door to "exceptions" which allow the woman to choose absent a life or death situation then it is hypocritical to say "my exceptions but not yours."
Click to expand...

I am not so sure that the "life of the mother" option is agreed upon...

Can you explain what "life of the mother" means to you?

Does it mean she is in the throws of death, where death is a certainty?

Does it mean she could have a process that could lead to death, but death was not a certainty?

What about if her kidneys were becoming impaired, and the stress of pregnancy may mean her kidneys would fail?
 
year2late said:
I am not so sure that the "life of the mother" option is agreed upon...

Can you explain what "life of the mother" means to you?

Does it mean she is in the throws of death, where death is a certainty?

Does it mean she could have a process that could lead to death, but death was not a certainty?

What about if her kidneys were becoming impaired, and the stress of pregnancy may mean her kidneys would fail?
Click to expand...

I would say that this is between the patient and her doctor (and let's not forget the husband or father). I'm not a woman, and to different woman they may have different tolerances and viewpoints, regarding major health changes in their life..
 
Captain Adverse said:
The "Life of the Mother" exception is already accepted by most Pro-Life advocates.

Your second exception is problematic; both for many Pro-Life advocates and for your stance in seeming opposition to Pro-Choice.

In the eyes of Pro-Life, it is not the baby's fault that it was conceived in violence. It is considered a wholly innocent victim of that act and is still a precious life worth preserving for it's own sake.

On the Pro-Choice side, if you can allow your own child the right to decide whether to keep the baby or abort it (albeit qualified by your "rape exception" scenario), then you are still allowing for choice based on her concerns of whether or not she can cope with having and raising it.

It is not so far a step to allow any woman this choice on the basis of her own concerns about whether she can cope with raising one or not.

Essentially, once you open the door to "exceptions" which allow the woman to choose absent a life or death situation then it is hypocritical to say "my exceptions but not yours."
Click to expand...

I agree the life is sacred and worth saving. If i was a woman I would definitely take this into consideration. However, I would still not "stand in judgement" of my daughter's decision.
 
Media_Truth said:
I would say that this is between the patient and her doctor (and let's not forget the husband or father). I'm not a woman, and to different woman they may have different tolerances and viewpoints, regarding major health changes in their life..
Click to expand...

My point is for those pro-lifers that say abortion if ever allowed is only to save the life of the mother. On this board, we have members that insist that means it is only for women that are in the throws of death.
 
Media_Truth said:
I agree the life is sacred and worth saving. If i was a woman I would definitely take this into consideration. However, I would still not "stand in judgement" of my daughter's decision.
Click to expand...

If you believe life is "sacred", then how could there be any reason to abort?

If life is sacred, then it's said that there's only one entity that makes it sacred. And that entity is said to be the sole power to give life and take it. How would you know which life was meant to survive a birth if the woman's life is determined to be at stake?
 
Removable Mind said:
If you believe life is "sacred", then how could there be any reason to abort?

If life is sacred, then it's said that there's only one entity that makes it sacred. And that entity is said to be the sole power to give life and take it. How would you know which life was meant to survive a birth if the woman's life is determined to be at stake?
Click to expand...

Because the woman may not want to go through a pregnancy; may not want a child; and may not see herself as a fit mother. The sex was not consensual. So I repeat - I am not going to stand in judgement of her decision. I will leave the role of judge to Jesus Christ and the woman in question.
 
in the event of the mothers life being in danger i do believe that she should be able to choose to terminate the pregnancy, not because the babies life is worthless, but because it should be assumed that if one of them must die than the infants death would be less impact-full. in the case of rape, abortion should not be on the table, i cannot see why the horrible crime of rape justifies the murder of an innocent baby.
 
Media_Truth said:
Because the woman may not want to go through a pregnancy; may not want a child; and may not see herself as a fit mother. The sex was not consensual. So I repeat - I am not going to stand in judgement of her decision.
Click to expand...
going through an unwanted pregnancy is horrible, murder is worse
if she doesn't want the child she can choose adoption, i don't get to force the woman to raise her child, i only believe she cannot kill the child. and aside from the mother having no choice for medical reasons, i will always judge murder.
 
cozmo14 said:
going through an unwanted pregnancy is horrible, murder is worse
if she doesn't want the child she can choose adoption, i don't get to force the woman to raise her child, i only believe she cannot kill the child. and aside from the mother having no choice for medical reasons, i will always judge murder.
Click to expand...

Well, you would be wrong. Murder is a specific offense with a strict definition. Killing a fetus does not fit that definition. So, try try again.
 
In a perfect world, no one would need an abortion. People would practice birth control, men would not rape, and fetuses would all be healthy and stand a chance of living a long life. Unfortunately, we live not in a perfect world. People who do not want babies do not all use birth control, some men do rape and occasionally a fetus is so deformed that it stands zero chance of living a normal, healthy life. It's for those situations that legal abortion is a necessity.
 
calamity said:
Well, you would be wrong. Murder is a specific offense with a strict definition. Killing a fetus does not fit that definition. So, try try again.
Click to expand...

Call it killing then. The fact still remains that the unborn had no part in the rape and there is no rational reason to hold it accountable for it.
 
calamity said:
some men do rape and occasionally a fetus is so deformed that it stands zero chance of living a normal, healthy life. It's for those situations that legal abortion is a necessity.
Click to expand...

ok, so that second part was just downright creepy, and you don't actually believe it, ya know how i know, because i don't think whenever you see a deformed person you feel bad they weren't aborted.

as for your other remarks aborting the baby is murder by definition as you are taking a human life, we know its a human life as you do not develop into a human but as a human.
 
cozmo14 said:
ok, so that second part was just downright creepy, and you don't actually believe it, ya know how i know, because i don't think whenever you see a deformed person you feel bad they weren't aborted.
Click to expand...
I'm referring to someone who is born permanently bedridden or otherwise incapacitated.

as for your other remarks aborting the baby is murder by definition as you are taking a human life, we know its a human life as you do not develop into a human but as a human.
Click to expand...
It's not murder. Murder has a strict legal definition. Abortion does not qualify because a fetus is not a legal human being.
 
Henrin said:
Call it killing then. The fact still remains that the unborn had no part in the rape and there is no rational reason to hold it accountable for it.
Click to expand...

We're not holding it accountable. We're just killing it.
 
calamity said:
We're not holding it accountable. We're just killing it.
Click to expand...

If a woman kills her child because it was the result of rape she is holding it accountable for the rape.
 
Henrin said:
If a woman kills her child because it was the result of rape she is holding it accountable for the rape.
Click to expand...

SHe's not killing a child though. Duh.
 
calamity said:
I'm referring to someone who is born permanently bedridden or otherwise incapacitated.
Click to expand...

well then what happens when any person goes into a coma?

and i'm saying it should be considered murder, i know it currently isn't. and why should the fetus not be considered a legal human being, because it's a clump of cells? from a scientific standpoint what the fetus looks like does not matter it is merely a human being in the earliest stages of development. to say that it can be legally killed due to not being fully developed is just creating your own little loophole and then exploiting.
 
cozmo14 said:
well then what happens when any person goes into a coma?

and i'm saying it should be considered murder, i know it currently isn't. and why should the fetus not be considered a legal human being, because it's a clump of cells? from a scientific standpoint what the fetus looks like does not matter it is merely a human being in the earliest stages of development. to say that it can be legally killed due to not being fully developed is just creating your own little loophole and then exploiting.
Click to expand...
Because it has no Brain, and until there is one there is no place for the Person to move into, meaning no one is actually moved in. Hence why even Conservative states have abortion legal to 20 to 22 weeks when the Brain is actually being formed. Clear it up?
 
Media_Truth said:
Let me first say that I don't believe in abortion as a form of birth control. Surely, partners in sex can get more creative with their birth control choices. That said, if a doctor told me that my wife would probably die while giving birth, I would encourage her to abort the child. Likewise, if my daughter was raped and impregnated, I would respect her decision to bear the child or abort.
Click to expand...

As a prolifer I have zero issues with abortion being legal for rape victims. The whole situation is terrible but if that's where the law is I'm ok with that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom