• 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!

Republicans justification for denying a rape victim an abortion

One of the principles Our Constitution and our country was formed on was Religious Liberty.

The right to privacy, body autonomy, and legal access to abortion is a part of our Religious Liberty in the United States.



The Religious Coalition for Reproduce Choice is made of Jewish and Christian Clergy and members of about 30 faiths and religious groups.

RCRC is unique in the reproductive health, rights and justice movements, because it draws on the moral power of diverse religious communities.
Click to expand...

The Moral Case – Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice

Their statement :
Good policy allows people of all religions to follow their own faiths and consciences in their own lives. In reproductive health, rights and justice,
we define religious liberty as the right of a woman to make thoughtful decisions in private consultation with her doctor, her family and her faith. The religious beliefs of others should not interfere.
Click to expand...

The Moral Case – Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice

From a recent news article:

Members of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, an interfaith group that advocates for abortion rights and is based in Washington, D.C., said that Alabama’s “uncommonly harsh” bill was an affront to their religious convictions.

“These laws are designed and supported by elected officials who speak of their conservative Christianity as though it were the only authentic religious point of view. It isn’t,” the coalition said in a statement.

“We are Christians, Jews, people of other faiths and of no faith, and we demand accountability from our elected officials in protecting religious liberty, which requires ensuring that no one set of religious beliefs is ever imposed on us all. That’s our right as Americans.”
Click to expand...

Read more:

Progressive Women Of Faith Decry Restrictive Abortion Bills As Immoral | HuffPost
 
Last edited:
prometeus said:
That is why the fetus is aborted, because if you set aside your ignorance, you will realize that growing up and going through life with the knowledge that your father was a rapist is a heavy price to pay.
Click to expand...

I agree. I'd much rather be aborted than be born a rapist's progeny.
 
Scrabaholic said:
I agree. I'd much rather be aborted than be born a rapist's progeny.
Click to expand...
It may surprise you to hear that this attitude isn't uncommon, it's called "shaming of rape conception", and it contributes to the social stigma that children born of rape face while trying to live normal lives in society.
 
COTO said:
It may surprise you to hear that this attitude isn't uncommon, it's called "shaming of rape conception", and it contributes to the social stigma that children born of rape face while trying to live normal lives in society.
Click to expand...


There is no social stigma of children born from rape. How would the public even know???

Would you seriously want to go through life knowing that the only reason you exist is because a man violated your mother?
 
Scrabaholic said:
There is no social stigma of children born from rape. How would the public even know???

Would you seriously want to go through life knowing that the only reason you exist is because a man violated your mother?
Click to expand...
I seriously wouldn't care.

If I was told tomorrow that I was conceived in rape, neither the identity of my biological father nor the circumstances of my conception would matter one whit to my identity or sense of worth. If you can think of any reasons why they should, let me know.

What would upset me is finding out that the man I believed to be my biological father wasn't really my biological father, and, more importantly, that my parents withheld knowledge of my true parentage from me for 36 years, but I'd get over these too. I love my parents and I know they love me.

As for "How would the public even know?": I don't know. All I know is that you can search for "shaming of rape conception" and find all kinds of information about the stigma.

No, the true burden of being a child conceived in rape would be twofold: i) the more likely absence of a father figure, if you weren't given up for adoption and your mother didn't marry prior to the end of your infancy, and ii) the increased likelihood that your mother wouldn't give you up for adoption but--either by choice or inadvertently--didn't love you as much or even resented you.

Growing up in a family where your mother resented you or somehow blamed you for the rape would cut deep. This would be a heavy burden to bear, even if it has no basis in reason.

Even so, as I said before, if having emotional baggage--or, more specifically, the greater potential for emotional baggage--was justification enough to kill somebody, there wouldn't be many of us left walking around circa 2019. Emotionally, we're a pretty sick society.
 
COTO said:
Even so, as I said before, if having emotional baggage--or, more specifically, the greater potential for emotional baggage--was justification enough to kill somebody, there wouldn't be many of us left walking around circa 2019. Emotionally, we're a pretty sick society.
Click to expand...

We are not talking about killing people.

I would not want to be the product of rape.
 
COTO said:
I seriously wouldn't care.
Click to expand...
Of course not. Such things are not something self centered people consider.

If you can think of any reasons why they should, let me know.
Click to expand...
Your mother...

What would upset me is finding out that the man I believed to be my biological father wasn't really my biological father
Click to expand...
Because in your world parenthood is a biological function.
 
Scrabaholic said:
We are not talking about killing people.

I would not want to be the product of rape.
Click to expand...
If a foetus isn't a human being, whether the child it "becomes" (I guess...?) cares about being the product of rape is irrelevant to abortion. The foetus isn't a human being. It's a soulless rock. Get rid of it. Don't get rid of it. It doesn't matter.

If a foetus is a human being--a soul--whether that soul cares about being the product of rape is irrelevant to abortion. Just because a human being has emotional distress or will have emotional distress doesn't justify killing him/her. If you disagree, you and I live in different moral universes.

Either way, "not wanting to be the product of rape", even if it was guaranteed and universal, is irrelevant to the issue of abortion.

prometeus said:
Of course not. Such things are not something self centered people consider.
Click to expand...
I'm... self-centered... because I don't care about the circumstances of my conception. :roll:

You know what? There might be some people among the readership here who were conceived in rape or violence. Why don't you enlighten us all as to why they should feel like crap, and how they're self-centered if they don't.

prometeus said:
Your mother...
Click to expand...
My sympathizing with my mother is supposed to impact my identity and sense of self-worth? If I don't hate myself enough, I'm legitimizing the rape? What? You're going to have to explain this one to me.

prometeus said:
Because in your world parenthood is a biological function.
Click to expand...
Absolutely not. My father is the man who raised me, not the one who contributed the genetic material.

Certainly I inherit some genetic traits from my biological father. "Predestination to rape" is not one of them. Neither is "bad mojo". The fear that I'll turn out to be a rapist is pure bloody superstition.

I'm not saying the stigma is easy for everyone to overcome, but I'll be damned if I'm going to come on a public message board and opine, "Well, some people conceived in rape feel this way, and others imagine they'd feel this way, so I guess I'd better cluck my tongue and pretend it isn't illogical."

No. Whether you're conceived in rape, or on a wedding day on a bed of roses, or in the back of a dingy Camaro behind a strip club in Beirut, your worth as a human being is neither diminished nor magnified by the circumstances of your conception. This is the truth, and this is the message I'm sticking to.
 
gulfman said:
If the woman enjoys it is it still rape?
Click to expand...

Can't believe that this needs to be answered. A person's Body Can respond in ways that her mind wouldn't approve. It doesn't mean she enjoyed it. It means she was violated and is even ashamed by her body's instinctual response. So if a person says no, just back off. Just because you can get a response out of her doesn't mean it's not rape.
 
COTO said:
If a foetus isn't a human being, whether the child it "becomes" (I guess...?) cares about being the product of rape is irrelevant to abortion. The foetus isn't a human being. It's a soulless rock. Get rid of it. Don't get rid of it. It doesn't matter.

If a foetus is a human being--a soul--whether that soul cares about being the product of rape is irrelevant to abortion. Just because a human being has emotional distress or will have emotional distress doesn't justify killing him/her. If you disagree, you and I live in different moral universes.

Either way, "not wanting to be the product of rape", even if it was guaranteed and universal, is irrelevant to the issue of abortion.


I'm... self-centered... because I don't care about the circumstances of my conception. :roll:

You know what? There might be some people among the readership here who were conceived in rape or violence. Why don't you enlighten us all as to why they should feel like crap, and how they're self-centered if they don't.


My sympathizing with my mother is supposed to impact my identity and sense of self-worth? If I don't hate myself enough, I'm legitimizing the rape? What? You're going to have to explain this one to me.


Absolutely not. My father is the man who raised me, not the one who contributed the genetic material.

Certainly I inherit some genetic traits from my biological father. "Predestination to rape" is not one of them. Neither is "bad mojo". The fear that I'll turn out to be a rapist is pure bloody superstition.

I'm not saying the stigma is easy for everyone to overcome, but I'll be damned if I'm going to come on a public message board and opine, "Well, some people conceived in rape feel this way, and others imagine they'd feel this way, so I guess I'd better cluck my tongue and pretend it isn't illogical."

No. Whether you're conceived in rape, or on a wedding day on a bed of roses, or in the back of a dingy Camaro behind a strip club in Beirut, your worth as a human being is neither diminished nor magnified by the circumstances of your conception. This is the truth, and this is the message I'm sticking to.
Click to expand...

You pro birthers do realize rights are granted at PERSONhood, not "human life."

It says a whole lot about the law and order party that they don't even understand the basics of law.
 
COTO said:
If a foetus isn't a human being, whether the child it "becomes" (I guess...?) cares about being the product of rape is irrelevant to abortion. The foetus isn't a human being. It's a soulless rock. Get rid of it. Don't get rid of it. It doesn't matter.

If a foetus is a human being--a soul--whether that soul cares about being the product of rape is irrelevant to abortion. Just because a human being has emotional distress or will have emotional distress doesn't justify killing him/her. If you disagree, you and I live in different moral universes.

Either way, "not wanting to be the product of rape", even if it was guaranteed and universal, is irrelevant to the issue of abortion.
Click to expand...

It's not irrelevant to the woman who is pregnant from rape and contemplating an abortion.

Zefs are not human beings. That is fact.
 
COTO said:
If a foetus is a human being--a soul--whether that soul cares about being the product of rape is irrelevant to abortion.
Click to expand...

Let me isolate that sentence because it seems to show a part of your argument - you are COMPLETELY focused on this unborn *whatever term you like* to the complete exclusion of the woman that must carry and nurture it. How can you do that? Is the woman completely devoid of rights such that she must carry a rapist's baby to term simply because she's pregnant, constantly being reminded of the rape she endured?

How is this Christian, since that is your angle? Do you accept that you have virtually sentenced the woman in this case? That is moral? How?

My view is that if she feels like you and wants to have the child regardless of circumstance, so be it. If she wants to abort, so be it. The rapist certainly doesn't deserve a child any more than the woman deserves to endure the pregnancy/birth. Again, you put the zef about all others. By what justification? I don't accept black/white religious morality, even when it's self-consistent. This is not even consistent.
 
Last edited:
Obscurity said:
You pro birthers do realize rights are granted at PERSONhood, not "human life."

It says a whole lot about the law and order party that they don't even understand the basics of law.
Click to expand...
The law is whatever the man with the gavel says it is. It isn't consistent across time, space, culture, or even judge-to-judge interpretation. Right now, state Republicans are evidently redefining personhood--or at least certain aspects of it.

Such is man's law. It changes with the seasons. I recommend you not head to Alabama, perform abortions, and then lecture the judge on how he "[doesn't] even understand the basics of law" in an attempt to save your neck.

Scrabaholic said:
Zefs are not human beings. That is fact.
Click to expand...
No it's not.

It's a fact that they're not legally considered persons in various jurisdictions throughout the world--which also happens to be a fact irrelevant to the morality of abortion.

<alt>doxygen said:
Let me isolate that sentence because it seems to show a part of your argument - you are COMPLETELY focused on this unborn *whatever term you like* to the complete exclusion of the woman that must carry and nurture it. How can you do that? Is the woman completely devoid of rights such that she must carry a rapist's baby to term simply because she's pregnant, constantly being reminded of the rape she endured?

How is this Christian, since that is your angle? Do you accept that you have virtually sentenced the woman in this case? That is moral? How?
Click to expand...
It's an issue of moral priorities. See #49 and the subsequent arc with @Lursa here for a more detailed answer.

To somebody who doesn't consider *whatever term you like* human beings, or does consider them human beings but places a greater moral priority on easing the distress on the mother, a pro-life stance will never seem sensible, compassionate, or moral. This leads some people to wrongly presume pro-life advocates aren't aware of the grave imposition on the mother, or are indifferent to her hardship--and I suppose some possibly are--but the overwhelming majority (in my experience) are caring individuals exercising the greatest compassion they can within the bounds of foundational moral priorities. I myself assert these same priorities are universally good.

As I see it, discussions like this can only proceed in the hypothetical, such as my if/if not at the start of #33. Even here, the most that can be accomplished is to demonstrate to the opposing side why certain judgments make sense in the context of a specific moral framework.
 
COTO said:
It's a fact that they're not legally considered persons in various jurisdictions throughout the world--which also happens to be a fact irrelevant to the morality of abortion.
Click to expand...

They are not legally human beings in my country. And human being is the same as person.
 
COTO said:
I don't know about GOP legislators, but most workaday conservatives would see rapists put to death.
Click to expand...

And if that were the law, it would mean less rape victims would survive their ordeal. That is not your intent, but that would be the unintended consequence.
 
COTO said:
I feel for the mother, but one evil act doesn't justify another. Furthermore, if she's truly incapable of caring for her child or doesn't love it--which you'll note is rare, even in cases of rape--she can put it up for adoption as soon as it's born. Healthy newborns are usually adopted as quickly as the paperwork can be filled out, and so ends the mother's maternal responsibilities. "18 years of indentured servitude" and "irrevocably destroying [her] life" are the hyperbolic fictions you believe are needed to justify killing the child.
Click to expand...

Women can die from child birth... they can also lose pay, their jobs and the health of their body. Forcing them to be pregnant for one second longer than they want to be is a ****ing immoral and disgusting mindset to have.
 
Stealers Wheel said:
And if that were the law, it would mean less rape victims would survive their ordeal.
Click to expand...
It would mean a lot of things. Which is why the punishment isn't as severe as it ought to be.

But the just punishment for rape is death. One can't hold up the relatively lenient sentence we actually impose as though it were a just punishment and good standard.
 
Bucky said:
Republicans justification for denying a rape victim an abortion
Click to expand...

There is no justification, so whatever they say is bull****.
 
bongsaway said:
When the doctor who performs an abortion would get more jail time than the rapist, that tells me all I need to know about the republican party. Their cruel approach to anything they don't like is amazing.
Click to expand...
Damn, that's a good point.
 
COTO said:
It would mean a lot of things. Which is why the punishment isn't as severe as it ought to be.

But the just punishment for rape is death. One can't hold up the relatively lenient sentence we actually impose as though it were a just punishment and good standard.
Click to expand...

It sounds as though you are advocating for the death penalty, regardless of the consequences.
 
Stealers Wheel said:
It sounds as though you are advocating for the death penalty, regardless of the consequences.
Click to expand...
Different topic; different discussion.

My point is that while "When the doctor who performs an abortion would get more jail time than the rapist, that tells me all I need to know about the republican party," makes a nifty sound bite, it disregards why the latter gets more jail time than the former, and likewise disregards that most conservatives (including, I imagine, many Republican lawmakers) consider sentencing for rape far too lenient.

It's a comparison under false pretenses, in other words.
 
COTO said:
Different topic; different discussion.

My point is that while "When the doctor who performs an abortion would get more jail time than the rapist, that tells me all I need to know about the republican party," makes a nifty sound bite, it disregards why the latter gets more jail time than the former, and likewise disregards that most conservatives (including, I imagine, many Republican lawmakers) consider sentencing for rape far too lenient.

It's a comparison under false pretenses, in other words.
Click to expand...

Hi COTO. Haven't read the entire thread, but I have a question for you. If it was your call to make, would you force every woman who became impregnated ( with the possible exception of certain serious illness or death to the mother ) to carry to term ? If YES, what would the penalty be for any women that was found to have her pregnancy terminated by her own accord ? If NO, disregard. It's a moot point...thanks in advance.
 
COTO said:
Different topic; different discussion.

My point is that while "When the doctor who performs an abortion would get more jail time than the rapist, that tells me all I need to know about the republican party," makes a nifty sound bite, it disregards why the latter gets more jail time than the former, and likewise disregards that most conservatives (including, I imagine, many Republican lawmakers) consider sentencing for rape far too lenient.

It's a comparison under false pretenses, in other words.
Click to expand...

Did you not write this?
most workaday conservatives would see rapists put to death.
Click to expand...

I simply pointed out that by imposing capital punishment on rapists, it would mean that more rapists would be inclined to murder their victims, eliminating the testimony of the only eyewitness to their other crime. Your response seems to come down to 'Yeah, so what? Rapists still ought to be executed.'

Now please do not try to turn this into "you are sympathetic to rapists." I assure you I am not. I simply prioritize the needs of the victim over the punishment. I think it is more important that the victim survive than the rapist be 'sufficiently' punished.
 
COTO said:
You want the ends to justify the means.

I want a society of law that executes men only when their guilt can be established by more than a single witness, which is (whether you like it or not) the only evidence of non-consensual sex that features in many rape trials.

I also don't want the child to pay the price for the evil committed by his father.

I feel for the mother, but one evil act doesn't justify another. Furthermore, if she's truly incapable of caring for her child or doesn't love it--which you'll note is rare, even in cases of rape--she can put it up for adoption as soon as it's born. Healthy newborns are usually adopted as quickly as the paperwork can be filled out, and so ends the mother's maternal responsibilities. "18 years of indentured servitude" and "irrevocably destroying [her] life" are the hyperbolic fictions you believe are needed to justify killing the child.
Click to expand...

WOW aren't you glad you're not a woman. Easy to judge when you're not the one that has to deal. You don't feel squat for the woman. You want to try that bs about adoption again??

Fostering Change WA | Facebook
 
COTO said:
Different topic; different discussion.

My point is that while "When the doctor who performs an abortion would get more jail time than the rapist, that tells me all I need to know about the republican party," makes a nifty sound bite, it disregards why the latter gets more jail time than the former, and likewise disregards that most conservatives (including, I imagine, many Republican lawmakers) consider sentencing for rape far too lenient.

It's a comparison under false pretenses, in other words.
Click to expand...

So, why aren't they trying to get sentences increased?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom