How'd you feel: you're a woman, raped, pregnant, politicians say no abortion

I just read about this Newt Gingrich lecturing others how they are wrong, anti catholics, because they support mourning after pill... so try to imagine you are a woman living in a ghetto (poor) and you were raped by some illegal ugly diseased man, and you go to the hospital the next morning to try to abort, but Newt the president (or almost president to be on establishment media circus, or rick santorum for that matter) has made a strict law that "tough (*)(*)(*)(*)" you have to have this baby... describe to me in detail, your scenario raising and loving this child, that you can't quite afford...

 

This is a sensitive issue. I can understand how it could really destroy a woman emotionally (perhaps more).


I do not know where human life and mind begin. I don't know if it's at conception or if it's at birth or somewhere in the middle. This is one reason why I'm so iffy about abortion. If the thing doesn't have a mind I'm fine with it. If it does I say it's off limits.

This sadly includes instances of rape. I don't know where the line of "this is a baby and has a mind" is. However, I value a real, life, mindful human being more than anything else (perhaps tied with intelligent aliens if we meet some ). This includes trauma cause by keeping a kid that's a product of rape.


It makes me sound insensitive but that's where my values lie. Currently there's no science behind the mind and when it's 100% for sure in play so I'll keep quiet though.

 

Newt Gingrich is a moronic hypocrite. He has no problem imposing his idiotic Christian views on others, yet, this dude runs through wives like it's going out of style. He's the worst kind of scum.

 

Republican's don't care about this issue. It's just another way they brainwash their idiot constituents to vote for them. Every sane person knows killing some cells before they develop in to a human is not murder.

To make a woman suffer through child birth because of your religious beliefs is asinine.

 

I'd feel pretty awesome, because I'd have pulled out my concealed 9mm and killed a would be rapist.

Or do I have to pretend progressives prevented me from defending myself with a weapon to do this right?

 

There's the internet and then there's reality. You seem to live in the internet.

 

I'm not the one who believes women shouldn't be able to defend themselves from rapists.

 

I'm all for gun rights, but sometimes, it doesn't go down like that.

 

You are living in a fantasy land. Everyone thinks they can defend themselves until some dude creeps up behind them and knocks them out.

I think I'm a strong athletic guy, but if Brock Lesner jumped me in an alley, I probably would not be able to get my gun out in time to prevent him from beating me to a pulp.

I'm a realist though. Everyone on the Internet is a superhero!

 

Well that is a pretty goofy argument.

Rape is rape and has nothing to do with abortion. Abortion is a separate issue than rape. Rape is not inclusive to women. Do men that are raped require the morning after pill?

Your argument claims that all women who are raped choose to abort a fetus should one exist. Plenty of women are raped and do not get pregnant. Like wise some women suffer the misfortune of being raped and suffer an unwanted pregnancy and choose to keep the child.

As a conservative I don’t care one way or another. Pill no pill it makes no difference to me. But I do believe that like any other pharmaceutical drug in this country it will be misused and over used. Should there be health issues down the road to those who partake in such a drug and those people are liberals I’m 100% for handing them out like candy.

I care so little about the debauchery of Americans that I’m thinking vending machines that sells Kotex and morning after pills. Coming to a school near you.

 

Hahahaha, I agree with you on this one... hypocrisy on 'liberal' part...

 

I think we have something in common. I've always thought that suicide booths for the depressed were not necessarily a bad thing, because I believe for many, life is overvalued just so the government can play "we care about you" - I hate this hypocrisy.

 

when did we start punishing children for the sins of the father?

 

Glad you'd feel awesome! Just make sure you deliver that baby and enjoy!

 

A woman should definitely have the right to abort a pregnancy which was the result of rape.

 

I figure after shooting the would be rapist my theoretical and extremely attractive female self would do the talk show circuit and enjoy a life long career as a NRA spokesperson. 9 months later, instead of delivering a baby, she'd be relaxing on some beach some where.

 

Why not support both the right to defend yourself with a gun AND the right for women to make their own choices regarding a pregnancy?

That seems like the best route, honestly.

 

I just don't understand why we limit murdering children to the unborn. I say allow parents a 6 year trial period. And let's be fair, the human brain hasn't finished development until age 25. Before that they aren't people, they are just a post birth fetus.

 

Yeah...it would be impossible for the rapist to overpower and rape you before you got that gun out of your purse. My bad. But, just for argument's sake...you'd have the baby of course. Correct?

 

Well, if you're gonna be like that, I just have one question for you....

Are you against emergency abortions (cases when the mother has a high chance of dying during childbirth)?

 

In the face of eminent death? Yes, I would support the choice of an abortion.

Now I have a question for you, let's say a woman discovers her 6 year old post birth fetus is the product of rape. Would you support her choice to have the fetus aborted?

 

If you're just gonna ask retarded questions, I'm not going to continue this discussion.

Granted, I guess I should expect that from you.

 

It's just worth noting that if human life begins prior to birth, choice is irrelevant. No sane person would support the choice to abort a 6 year old child.

 

In a literal sense, life begins before conception. Sperm is living, just like eggs are.

A lot of people set the beginning at the zygote stage, but if that's done legally, then you have the same problem that a number of states are beginning to face with overzealous legislators.

There have been multiple lawmakers that have proposed legislation that essentially requires the investigation of miscarriages, since it is possible to force one by consuming certain substances. These methods were essentially the oldest forms of abortion.

For obvious reasons, that's not a slope we want to go down, because of the unnecessary harassment that would involve against women who naturally had miscarriages.

My argument is that, at the very least, the morning after pill should be legal, since aborting a zygote is vastly different from aborting a 3 or 6 month old fetus.

 

That's not an unreasonable position by any means.

I just find the choice argument to be incredibly lazy. The smugness with which it's brandished always irks me. Especially since the people who wield it tend to think I shouldn't be able to choose which light bulbs to use.