11-year-old Gang-Rape Victim: Should She Be Able To Legally Abort?

[bybee]

Here is a list of known biological mothers under 11 years of age. I already provided you a link explaining precocious puberty. What more evidence do you need?

Yes, there is such a thing as precocious puberty. But the majority of 11 year old females are prepubescent children. Their little bodies are not yet ready for sexual encounter. And most certainly they are not emotionally ready for such activity.
AND, what human being is ever ready for a massive physical assault by more than one person repeatedly beating and entering their body?

Abortion is a horrible thing.

What if you addressed your venom and your ire to men who lack self control? Men who snicker and say "boys will be boys" when it is someone else's daughter or sister who if forced into sex? What if you wait until you have direct experience of child sexual abuse, rape, incest, gang rape and then pronounce judgment?

Again, abortion is a horrible thing. I thank God that my life never necessitated even thinking of such an option.

 

[Granite]

Doormat keeps rolling out a list of pre-pubescent mothers as though he's proud of it, or something...

 

[Christian Liberty]

So it's not abortion per se you've got a problem with, nor do you have an issue rolling the dice when it comes to killing innocent people on death row. And yet you still call yourself a "pro-life" individual. You're also calling for charging abortionists and executing the rapist.

I don't support "Rolling the dice." I support the death penalty in extremely clear cut cases where the odds of an innocent person being killed is miniscule.

Ya know it's funny, but usually the more strident and self-proclaimed "pro-life" absolutists are the ones who talk the most about death. They're also the ones carrying the pictures of corpses.

Pro-life and pro-choice are stupid terms anyway. Yes, I do support death in certain circumstances (Death penalty, self-defense.) The pro-choice movement supports murder of millions of children, and the neocon movement supports murder of hundreds of thousands at the very best.

I make a distinction between those guilty of heinous crimes, and the innocent.

So you don't know a thing about ectopic pregnancies, which are rare but not unheard of.

I know in that case the baby dies no matter what, in which case, whatever you need to do to save the mother's life.

Easy for you to say (and despicable considering what she's gone through). You're not the eleven-year-old who was just gang raped, now are you. You're an outsider who thinks he knows how to best direct the course of her life, and let her wishes be damned. An eleven-year-old brutalized in this fashion stays innocent indefinitely, Rand. You're talking either like a really clueless kid or a hard-hearted old fart. Can't tell which.

So if she later buys a pistol and shoots up a school, she's still innocent?

The entire argument is ridiculous.

Right. You used more than one word to make clear you didn't care about the mother or what she wanted or her anguish or her suffering or what she'd been through or how potentially hellish the next nine months would be for her. My mistake.

What if in order to appease her suffering she wanted to shoot the rapist between the eyes? I'd let her do that, would you?

 

[Granite]

I don't support "Rolling the dice." I support the death penalty in extremely clear cut cases where the odds of an innocent person being killed is miniscule.

That's both swell and for the time being very unrealistic.

Pro-life and pro-choice are stupid terms anyway.

Completely agree.

I know in that case the baby dies no matter what, in which case, whatever you need to do to save the mother's life.

So you'd be willing to consider certain situations lost causes.

The entire argument is ridiculous.

No, but your attitude towards a rape victim strikes me as less-than-enlightened.

What if in order to appease her suffering she wanted to shoot the rapist between the eyes? I'd let her do that, would you?

Well this at least answers my question. I feel like I'm dealing with a manchild.

 

[illusionray]

Then stop claiming that what you're preaching is a Christian doctrine, if you can't defend it Biblically. Screw the Qu'ran

I won't because it IS a Christian doctrine as well. It makes far more sense. You can't have Christians saying ridiculous things like life from conception, earth is 6000 years old and many other things, those are not the kind of teachings that Christ would have wanted his followers to propagate because they are not true. It's a WRONG reading of the Bible. Life is NOT from conception and the Earth was created in Six distinct periods of time.

 

[Christian Liberty]

I won't because it IS a Christian doctrine as well. It makes far more sense. You can't have Christians saying ridiculous things like life from conception, earth is 6000 years old and many other things, those are not the kind of teachings that Christ would have wanted his followers to propagate because they are not true. It's a WRONG reading of the Bible. Life is NOT from conception and the Earth was created in Six distinct periods of time.

Its a "Christian Doctrine" that you can't defend from Scripture.

Regarding YEC/OEC I'm a YEC but I also don't really care all that much or think its all that big a deal.

Well this at least answers my question. I feel like I'm dealing with a manchild.

You're just a godless idiot who is OK with killing an innocent child but is not OK with killing a rapist. I guess the rapist's life is worth more than the innocent child

 

[Granite]

You're just a godless idiot who is OK with killing an innocent child but is not OK with killing a rapist. I guess the rapist's life is worth more than the innocent child

Are you even reading my posts? I already said I supported the rapist's execution and have said that the decision to terminate the pregnancy in this scenario isn't an easy one, but one that I believe is probably correct. So either stop getting hysterical and attempt to act like an adult or don't bother responding to my posts. If you can handle a discussion, great. If you want to have a temper tantrum, I won't waste my time.

The innocent child you keep ignoring is the eleven-year-old. Really doesn't seem like you care or think about her at all.

The tender mercies of the wicked are cruel.

 

[bybee]

Its a "Christian Doctrine" that you can't defend from Scripture.

Regarding YEC/OEC I'm a YEC but I also don't really care all that much or think its all that big a deal.



You're just a godless idiot who is OK with killing an innocent child but is not OK with killing a rapist. I guess the rapist's life is worth more than the innocent child

He didn't say that you raving booby!

 

[illusionray]

You're just a godless idiot who is OK with killing an innocent child but is not OK with killing a rapist. I guess the rapist's life is worth more than the innocent child

Good point.

 

[Granite]

He didn't say that you raving booby!

Thanks dear. Rational thinking's showing up here less and less.

 

[Doormat]

Rational thinking's showing up here less and less.

And here you prove your claim:

Doormat keeps rolling out a list of pre-pubescent mothers as though he's proud of it, or something...

That's a great example of irrational thinking, Granite. You ignore the definition of prepubescent to mount an ad hominem attack that doesn't reflect the reality of what has occurred.

 

[Doormat]

Yes, there is such a thing as precocious puberty.

I'll accept that as a concession. Now please educate Granite.

But the majority of 11 year old females are prepubescent children.

And they can't get pregnant!

Abortion is a horrible thing.

Then don't support it.

 

[bybee]

I'll accept that as a concession. Now please educate Granite.



And they can't get pregnant!



Then don't support it.

I don't support abortion you dipstick!
How about you showing some compassion for rape victims, especially children?

 

[Granite]

That's a great example of irrational thinking, Granite.

Actually it's a prime example of my sarcasm.:chuckle:

You ignore the definition of prepubescent to mount an ad hominem attack that doesn't reflect the reality of what has occurred.

An ad hom attack against who or what, exactly? The reality of what's occurred is evident based on the hypothetical in the OP: An eleven-year-old's gang raped and impregnated. That's the reality of the scenario. What exactly do you think I'm missing here?

That children of this age can conceive and have in some cases does not make this an ideal or even healthy situation.

The possibility of this outcome doesn't justify it, or change how bizarre and unusual it is.

 

[WizardofOz]

There's nothing "natural" about rape.

I never said there was. Perhaps reread my post or ask for clarification if it's needed.

Once a female is pregnant, what would "allowing nature to take its course" entail?

 

[WizardofOz]

I believe Oz and Peace must clod only a few steps away from the rapists

Over the line and offensive. :down:
No one is accusing anyone of "clodding only a few steps away from the rapists". It's sad and immature of you to accuse anyone else of it.

Is this how you are going to conduct yourself? Pretty low...

by holding the notion that she must have deserved to be raped...

:down:
Absolute rubbish straw man. Who the hell ever said or even implied this?

"Deserved to be raped"? Quote me "holding the notion" or admit you're lying about my position.

Pathetic

else their moral idealism ..ie.. "letting nature take its course" holds limited authority.

After you decide to grow up and improve your conduct, feel free to answer the question I just asked Granite regarding "letting nature take it's course". Because, I would be happy to explain what doing so actually entails.

I guess your parents never had "the talk" with you when you were a lad :idunno:

 

[Doormat]

I don't support abortion ...

Then vote no in the poll and prove it.

 

[Lighthouse]

Over the line and offensive. :down:
No one is accusing anyone of "clodding only a few steps away from the rapists". It's sad and immature of you to accuse anyone else of it.

Is this how you are going to conduct yourself? Pretty low...

:down:
Absolute rubbish straw man. Who the hell ever said or even implied this?

"Deserved to be raped"? Quote me "holding the notion" or admit you're lying about my position.

Pathetic

After you decide to grow up and improve your conduct, feel free to answer the question I just asked Granite regarding "letting nature take it's course". Because, I would be happy to explain what doing so actually entails.

I guess your parents never had "the talk" with you when you were a lad :idunno:

You can't really expect much else from someone willing to use a disparaging remark aimed at an entire group simply because he doesn't like a single certain person from said group.

 

[Christian Liberty]

Are you even reading my posts? I already said I supported the rapist's execution and have said that the decision to terminate the pregnancy in this scenario isn't an easy one, but one that I believe is probably correct. So either stop getting hysterical and attempt to act like an adult or don't bother responding to my posts. If you can handle a discussion, great. If you want to have a temper tantrum, I won't waste my time.

The innocent child you keep ignoring is the eleven-year-old. Really doesn't seem like you care or think about her at all.

The tender mercies of the wicked are cruel.

OK... so we have established that an 11 year old, by virtue of being raped, is made perpetually innocent and therefore has a right to commit murder... but for some reason, this only applies to her unborn child.

Do I understand you now?

The problem is: "Think about the 11 year old girl" is a purely emotion-based argument. There's nothing logical about it.

 

[quip]

Yup, case closed. As a trusted authority figure you could probably talk her into suicide, too. That'll really clean things up. (not)

lain:

Why waste both our times making stupid remarks such as this?

It has everything to do with my point. But to understand - that will require critical thinking skills. Put your thinking cap on. I know you have one lying around somewhere.

Consensual sex has "everything to do with [your] point" regarding the rape and unintentional pregnancy of an eleven year old?!! :doh:

Motherhood began when she was impregnated against her will. All parents can do is respect the life inside her or take the responsibility of killing an innocent. Something they shouldn't have to think about at all but such is the state of our society.

No the natural state of conception/pregnancy began with such an act. Don't presuppose motherhood then demand her and the family must accept your defacto interpretation.

The point that the possibility of motherhood is already in the cards for her. That she will most likely choose motherhood freely in the future and that no matter what happens her body has changed in the way it is designed and no abortion will change it back.

In fact, the natural outcome of young motherhood is better fertility and a reduction in the risks of certain diseases. The baby is not a cancer but a valuable human being and her family member.

Several points to ponder here:

1. No, motherhood is not in the cards for her. This entire debate consists of choices; the choice between motherhood or not.

2. No, abortion won't "change it [her body] back" yet, birth will not "change it back" either...this point is useless.

3. There's no more risk involved with abortion than with giving birth...this point is moot.

4. "A valuable human being" says who...you? Subjective ramblings.

Throwing out that she may have consensual sex and wish to murder her child in the future is nothing but a dodge.

Where does this come from? :dizzy:

And isn't that what we are here for? So....

Apparently not from you...you "know" and thus are morally demanding her course of action.

Abortion is the whim. Forced impregnation was the whim. Nature taking it's course with life is not a whim.

Forcing her to give birth is a whim. :idunno: Your point?

She will if a trusted authority takes her in where they will take off her clothes, hold her down and go into that already traumatized part of her body to re-traumatize it while denying her a living relative - all to please themselves that a "bastard child" won't be born. This is exactly the problem with forced abortion.

This is simply a barbaric scenario constructed as such to generate sympathy for your position. What makes you believe that therapy and compassion would not be shown during the procedure (for an already traumatized girl..no less)? This is mere contrived drama on your part.

...And?

And...your points are becoming increasingly pointless.