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

[Granite]

While that's an admirable personal standard.... You've yet to objectively establish a universal "obligation to refrain.." nor specify how the abortion scenario amounts to a "unwarranted abrogation".

Abrogating the rights of the rape victim doesn't seem to faze many folks here at all if the idea even occurs to them in the first place.

 

[Town Heretic]

While that's an admirable personal standard.... You've yet to objectively establish a universal "obligation to refrain.."

Thanks, but I rather did.

2. Among those rights the right to the possession of my life is fundamental and cannot be abridged at law absent a fairly egregious violation of the compact that protects it.​

nor specify how the abortion scenario amounts to a "unwarranted abrogation".

Absent the justification we've set as the narrow litmus for denial of the right the right is unjustly abrogated.

Abrogating the rights of the rape victim doesn't seem to faze many folks here at all if the idea even occurs to them in the first place.

Rather, recognizing that all rights are not equal in stature is entirely rational. Just so every right and exercise is negated by the absence of the one thing that makes them possible, life.

Society recognizes the different valuations which is why we don't sentence people to death for stealing, violating the seat belt laws or being publicly intoxicated.

 

[Granite]

Rather, recognizing that all rights are not equal in stature is entirely rational.

True, but you and I are looking at different sides of the scale, as it were.

 

[Rusha]

Abrogating the rights of the rape victim doesn't seem to faze many folks here at all if the idea even occurs to them in the first place.

Which right/action always ends in death? (Giving birth or aborting)

Is that death intentional?

Which option allows both to live? (Giving birth or aborting)

Those are all either/or one word answers.

 

[Granite]

Which right/action always ends in death? (Giving birth or aborting)

Is that death intentional?

Which option allows both to live? (Giving birth or aborting)

Those are all either/or one word answers.

I don't consider this issue to be that simple. No one should.

 

[Rusha]

I don't consider this issue to be that simple. No one should.

I will take that as a refusal to answer three direct questions.

 

[Granite]

I will take that as a refusal to answer three direct questions.

You can take it however you please for all I care. I don't see this issue as anything less than a complex, nuanced, less-than-clean-cut tragedy, and there aren't any bite-size answers in my book that can answer the issues raised. This ain't Sesame Street.

 

[Rusha]

You can take it however you please for all I care. I don't see this issue as anything less than a complex, nuanced, less-than-clean-cut tragedy, and there aren't any bite-size answers in my book that can answer the issues raised. This ain't Sesame Street.

Did anyone suggest that it is *Sesame Street*?

Did anyone suggest that it is not complex or a tragedy?

On the other hand, some have suggested that one can only care about the mother by supporting her decision to intentionally kill her unborn baby.

The standout reason to be against abortion is because it intentionally kills an unborn baby. There is ALWAYS a victim.

Does one person's circumstance make the aborted child less of a victim?

Can a LIVING rape victim receive support and maintain life AFTER her rape?

Can an aborted baby receive support or maintain life AFTER his/her abortion?

Is abortion always permanent?

IF the mother feels guilty about the abortion, is it possible for her to take back her actions?

IF a mother gives birth and doesn't feel she can love or raise the child, does she have other options?

 

[Granite]

Did anyone suggest that it is not complex or a tragedy?

When it's boiled to "yes/no" the conversation takes a turn for the simplistic. There's too much going on to make this a binary discussion, far as I'm concerned.

On the other hand, some have suggested that one can only care about the mother by supporting her decision to intentionally kill her unborn baby.

Well, news to me, but maybe I've missed something on this thread. Who here said as much?

Does one person's circumstance make the aborted child less of a victim?

You seem to be endorsing personhood from the moment of conception. Since I don't, there may not be any reason to attempt a discussion. We're not speaking the same language. If we can agree on this difference (and it's a biggie) we may be able to avoid confusion in the future and not repeat ourselves.:cheers:

Can a LIVING rape victim receive support and maintain life AFTER her rape?

Of course. My concern stays with her, her circumstances, her situation, and her essential imprisonment in the scenario you, TH, and others here support. Her additional violation, in other words. She sure does need support--all the help she can get. What you'd deny is her autonomy should her wishes (which should be paramount) not happen to coincide with your own inflexible sense of morality. That's a major, major clash.

 

[Rusha]

On the other hand, some have suggested that one can only care about the mother by supporting her decision to intentionally kill her unborn baby.

Well, news to me, but maybe I've missed something on this thread. Who here said as much?

Of course. My concern stays with her, her circumstances, her situation, and her essential imprisonment in the scenario you, TH, and others here support. Her additional violation, in other words. She sure does need support--all the help she can get. What you'd deny is her autonomy should her wishes (which should be paramount) not happen to coincide with your own inflexible sense of morality. That's a major, major clash.

Oh, so sorry. I guess that you meant we do support her and don't really desire to imprison her and violate her further.

My bad for taking those words so literally.

 

[Granite]

Oh, so sorry. I guess that you meant we do support her and don't really desire to imprison her and violate her further.

My bad for taking those words so literally.

I don't know what you're talking about.

a) who here has suggested the only way to support the rape victim is endorsing an abortion? (No one, that I'm aware of)
b) if she wishes to abort, in your ideal scenario, she'd practically have to imprisoned and/or monitored to prevent as much--a reality you, TH, and others haven't really addressed yet

Let me know if I'm missing something.

 

[Rusha]

I don't know what you're talking about.

a) who here has suggested the only way to support the rape victim is endorsing an abortion? (No one, that I'm aware of)
b) if she wishes to abort, in your ideal scenario, she'd practically have to imprisoned and/or monitored to prevent as much--a reality you, TH, and others haven't really addressed yet

Let me know if I'm missing something.

Perhaps that FACT that TH, myself and others have not suggested imprisonment in any way, shape or form.

Is it a form of imprisonment to say I expect those like her rapist to refrain from raping because I do not support their right to rape?

The issue in regards to whether or not the unborn baby is every bit as deserving of life and protection as ALL OTHER unborn babies is not complex.

The issue that is complex is the mother's emotional state. No one has denied this.

Does that mean her child is less innocent?

Because Andrea Yates was a flatout nutcase, does that mean her children were less innocent?

Whether or not you realize it, you are devaluing unborn babies who are conceived via rape.

It is entirely possible to empathize and support another person without supporting the person's decision to use their freedom to hurt themselves or someone else.

 

[Granite]

Perhaps that FACT that TH, myself and others have not suggested imprisonment in any way, shape or form.

Realistically I don't know how else this would work. When you force a rape victim to carry a pregnancy against her will you would, by definition, have to consider the rape victim a potential threat--so how else would you absolutely guarantee she carries the pregnancy to term? Let's get real here. You'd have to keep an eye on her, possibly keep her under house arrest, ensure she gets to doctor's appointments, guarantee she brings no harm to the fetus, and probably even pull her passport should she have one lest she hightail it to a less-repressive country. Something to think about, anyway. I can't imagine you endorsing an honor system.

The issue in regards to whether or not the unborn baby is every bit as deserving of life and protection as ALL OTHER unborn babies is not complex.

Given the circumstances in this case I completely disagree.

The issue that is complex is the mother's emotional state. No one has denied this.

That's part of the equation, yes--one that you and TH, et. al., ultimately have to logically dismiss as incidental, secondary, less than important, etc.

Does that mean her child is less innocent?

For the last time: Two. Separate. Languages.

Because Andrea Yates was a flatout nutcase, does that mean her children were less innocent?

Yates has nothing to do with anything being discussed here.

It is entirely possible to empathize and support another person without supporting the person's decision to use their freedom to hurt themselves or someone else.

Can you imagine yourself personally "supporting" a rape victim known to you if she chooses to abort?

 

[Saved.One.by.Grace]

From a moral, ethical, scientific and religious standpoint, the answer is obviously no. From a legal standpoint as the laws are current written, the answer is obviously yes. That doesn't mean I support abortion as I believe moral, ethical, scientific and religious grounds support a pro-Life position from conception. But our laws and legal system say otherwise. I would NOT support any pro-abortion stance a politician or judge takes.

 

[Town Heretic]

...b) if she wishes to abort, in your ideal scenario, she'd practically have to imprisoned and/or monitored to prevent as much--a reality you, TH, and others haven't really addressed yet

Let me know if I'm missing something.

You're missing something. You make it illegal to obtain or provide. More doctors than not aren't going to risk their license, just as more people than not will obey the law. Will everyone? No, but you don't make or abandon laws by that litmus. And you don't put a policeman in every car driven by a citizen to make sure they follow the road sign instructions.

Would I put someone in jail for intentionally ending the life of another human being? Yes, I would. So would you or are you advocating the end of those laws? I'd also recognize mitigating circumstance, which happens every day. Emotional duress, capacity, ect. play into how people are charged and prosecuted, so it isn't a one size fits all response. So the range of responses would be and should be wed to circumstance and an encompassing understanding of the circumstances that led to the act.

 

[Rusha]

Realistically I don't know how else this would work. When you force a rape victim to carry a pregnancy against her will you would, by definition, have to consider the rape victim a potential threat--so how else would you absolutely guarantee she carries the pregnancy to term? Something to think about, anyway.

Certainly not by imprisoning her and her unborn baby during the pregnancy. Like everything else, IF AOD were illegal, it doesn't mean pregnant women would be rounded up and jailed until after giving birth. Like everyone else, they would know there are legal consequences for choosing to kill their unborn baby.

Since when do we imprison someone PRIOR to breaking a law?

Given the circumstances in this case I completely disagree.

Please explain to me how a child conceived out of rape VS a child conceived via consent are biologically different.

That's part of the equation, yes--one that you and TH, et. al., ultimately have to logically dismiss as incidental, secondary, less than important, etc.

That hasn't happened. Not supporting the killing of her unborn child does not mean she is being dismissed.

For the last time: Two. Separate. Languages.

Yates has nothing to do with anything being discussed here.

She absolutely does. Her mental frailty was an issue in the case.

Can you imagine yourself personally "supporting" a rape victim if she chooses to abort? How exactly would that work?

I already said one can support victims of rape without supporting their right to kill their unborn baby.

IF a child is beaten while they are growing up, can I support their circumstances without supporting their right to beat their significant other or own children?

 

[Granite]

Certainly not by imprisoning her and her unborn baby during the pregnancy. Like everything else, IF AOD were illegal, it doesn't mean pregnant women would be rounded up and jailed until after giving birth. Like everyone else, they would know there are legal consequences for choosing to kill their unborn baby.

So you'd be okay rolling the dice, essentially.

Since when do we imprison someone PRIOR to breaking a law?

Would you consider a rape victim who made it clear she wanted to terminate the pregnancy a threat or not?

Please explain to me how a child conceived out of rape VS a child conceived via consent are biologically different.

Doesn't address my point.

That hasn't happened. Not supporting the killing of her unborn child does not mean she is being dismissed.

Not completely, but she's less of a priority overall.

I already said one can support victims of rape without supporting their right to kill their unborn baby.

Maybe so but you didn't answer my question.

 

[Rusha]

So you'd be okay rolling the dice, essentially.

Oh. You wanted me to say I think she should be imprisoned? Hmmm.

The only choice you see is throwing her in prison or allowing/encouraging her to abort?

Would you consider a rape victim who made it clear she wanted to terminate the pregnancy a threat or not?

I would consider her to be someone who need reassurance and guidance. She would know the consequences. Just as anyone who murders, rapes, assaults, etc.

We don't put people in a cell PRIOR to committing a crime.

Doesn't address my point.

It absolutely does. Allowing one person to not kill another person does not mean one is considered secondary.

Not completely, but she's less of a priority overall.

In your scenario, she is the ONLY priority.

Maybe so but you didn't answer my question.

I have answered all of your questions, you just don't like my answers.

No one needs to intentionally kill another human being in order to get better.

It is highly likely that at some point, she will feel guilt for killing her unborn child. The irony is ... there was a superior option.

 

[Granite]

You're missing something. You make it illegal to obtain or provide.

Okay, I guess that's the magic wand I've been missing this whole time.

More doctors than not aren't going to risk their license, just as more people than not will obey the law.

With all the gruesome consequences we remember. Charming time, that.

Would I put someone in jail for intentionally ending the life of another human being? Yes, I would. So would you or are you advocating the end of those laws?

I see no problem with assisted suicide so you're probably asking the wrong guy.

I'd also recognize mitigating circumstance, which happens every day. Emotional duress, capacity, ect. play into how people are charged and prosecuted, so it isn't a one size fits all response. So the range of responses would be and should be wed to circumstance and an encompassing understanding of the circumstances that led to the act.

I don't have to rework this response very much to use it my own advantage--shows how much unexpected overlap there is on this issue, for very different reasons.

 

[Granite]

Oh. You wanted me to say I think she should be imprisoned? Hmmm.

Following your thinking to its logical concluson I don't see how else you could see the unborn fetus as anything less than an endangered potential murder victim--the rape victim made it clear she wishes to terminate the pregnancy. But you seem okay with letting her do as she pleases without any oversight. If she has a passport and catches a flight to Sweden, well...

The only choice you see is throwing her in prison or allowing/encouraging her to abort?

See above. From your standpoint I don't see how you can't observe her twenty-four-seven.

I would consider her to be someone who need reassurance and guidance. She would know the consequences. Just as anyone who murders, rapes, assaults, etc.

Comparing her to her assailant is despicable, hands down.:nono:

In your scenario, she is the ONLY priority.

Her wishes and concerns are paramount. I support any decision she makes.

It is highly likely that at some point, she will feel guilt for killing her unborn child.

Statistics do not bear this out at all.