Originally Posted by Jerry

If I were pro-choice, I would argue that rape should be an exception not because the child was a danger, but because the woman might not want a permanent relationship with the rapist. She might not want the rapist to have court ordered access to her life.

However, to fit that into this thought experiment, one would have to establish that whoever broke into the home and put the child there would have legal rights to approach the property for visitation into the foreseeable future; the proximity of the criminal to the building might spark the criminal's propensity for breaking and entering, vandalism, etc.

As pro-life, however, I argue that child should not be kicked outside to certain death simply because some other person might, maybe, post a statistical risk to the building in the future. I would suggest investing in home security.

Originally Posted by windovervocalcords

What it still gets back to is the 'pro-life' crowd is pro-fetal life and value the zygote over the life of the pregnant woman--someone who is already a person, a fully grown human being and a citizen in the eyes of the law.

Originally Posted by Chuz Life

Again, for the record.

Chuz Life <----- is not 'prolife'

Originally Posted by windovervocalcords

Do you usually speak of yourself in the third person?

Originally Posted by kerussll

It's not about a worry that the rapist will someday gain visitation rights. It's about a traumatized woman being forced to live with a daily reminder of her attack, at a significant risk to her physical health and mental status.

Originally Posted by Jerry

The simple fact that one would look at their own child and see nothing but rape is evidence of a crippled mental status.

Give the child up for adoption. If all you see is rape when you look at your own blood then giving it up should be fairly easy.

Originally Posted by kerussll

I was speaking of the pregnancy.

Originally Posted by Jerry

Well I suppose then that seeing the child in the living room would be a constant reminder of the home invasion....still doesn't give anyone the right to kick the child out.

Beat the **** out of the home invaders, hell yeah, but the child didn't do anything. If you think or feel something when you look at the child, that's you choosing to think it, not the child forcing you to think it.

The child is every bit as much a victim as the raped woman is.

Originally Posted by kerussll

So I should beat the **** out of my home invaders, but protect my bodily invaders?