Thirteen-year-old girl is forced to give birth under Mississippi abortion ban

If she has the courage to walk into an abortion clinic and tell them she needs an abortion, then she has the courage to report a sexual crime against her.

So she is okay killing the life growing inside of her (her biological child) but making sure a rapist is put behind bars so he will not do this to another woman is too uncomfortable for her?

That argument does not really make too much logical sense. Might be better if you go with the she's living in denial argument, until it comes to the point where her belly is swollen and showing and she feels kicking and can deny it no longer.

 

Noticing you skipped the body portion — do you deny that a fetus or zygote uses the organs of the woman? You seem to be unable answer any questions here.

The most similar instance would be when someone is classified as brain dead — they can be taken off life support by their immediate family.

You seem to be making a ton of excuses for the pro-birth agenda but you do you.

The same group demanding children have children is also saying school lunches should be banned and that healthcare should only be for those that can afford it.

“Saving a life” is commendable but that’s not the only thing that is going on here. The people that want to save a life do not concern themselves with the situation of the life after they have forced its birth. They do not care about the rights of the mother.

If you feel those are “stupid arguments” than we differ. They are very concerning problems created by the right deciding they should be able to control others.

As to your desire that congress do something, no agreement will be reached. Your side (and by that I mean republicans) want abortion banned after 6 weeks with an ultimate goal of a complete ban. Democrats on the other hand believe it should be up to the woman and her medical provider — not the state.

While it is sad to see what your team did to destroy the image of the USSC and the damages it is causing, I am glad it has made average Americans see just how dangerous the Republican Party is. Let’s hope it destroys it.

 

'

 

You obviously have no idea what it does to a raped female in terms of trauma. Being held down by a much stronger person and have somebody force their penis inside them repeatedly often leaving bruising tearing and abrasions and not only inside the vagina. There is also the risk of STD’s including HIV infection. If a woman has been raped they first have to submit to having a rape kit done which involves combing the pubic hair, an exam of the vagina and so forth. It takes a lot of courage to walk into a police station and say you have been raped, describe it detail, having to relive it over and over during a subsequent trial and that’s if they catch the rapist. If a woman gets pregnant by rape and her decision is to have an abortion it takes no courage to walk into a clinic to get the medical care she wants and needs due to her own personal decision because she is okay aborting the product of a rape.

You have no idea what you are actually talking about. It’s because of people like you that women don’t actually report being raped. It’s because of the misery women have to tolerate if they do report a rape. Women who get raped are either on birth control or not on birth control. Pregnancy is always a risk after being raped. Most women who get raped know they are pregnant after missing their next menstrual period and immediately make a decision. You make it sound like women are stupid cretins who will deny being pregnant then decide to abort when the fetus is viable. You make it sound like women are weak and lack courage. You seem to believe if a women reports being raped, the rapist will be put jail. It has been estimated that only 0.60% of rapists actually go to jail in the US per years. Only 5.7% of rapists get arrested per year. And you consistently make excuses for rapists and call those that accuse men of rape liars. To me the woman who has been raped is the most important. The rapist is the least. It’s up to each individual to decide if they want to report a rape and yes many don’t because they prefer not to go through all the trauma that goes with it due to the fact that most rapists walk free. So let’s not call rape victims murderers when they make the personal choice to abort and and lets not blame a rape victim for not reporting a rape.

 

Because it's a silly comparison. But, to answer your question, there are many cases where people cannot do something because the state has deemed it to be unhealthy or against their best interest. Additionally, assisted suicide is illegal.

You seem to be under the impression that being brain dead is not dead. Life support only maintains the organs whether the person would have wanted that or not before they died.

As stated previously, I try to understand both sides of an argument. Arguing on behalf of an opposing view is a great way to really flesh out the arguments. I can honestly say that I think I do understand both sides. You obviously cannot because, like the born again people, think that you are morally superior. That is the real reason that no agreement can be reached.

 

That is what I asked. Can you name another instance of where a person is forced to give their body to another against their will, even if a refusal would cause the other persons death.

It is still a human though. Strange how the definition of life varies in these two instances.

I somewhat understand the pro-birth side, they view it as a unique life with a soul (typically religious based arguments). What I do not understand is how they are pro-birth but then do not want to do anything to help the child they have now forced to be brought into the world.

No agreement can be made because one side’s argument isn’t a moral one — it’s a religious one.

 

It's unique, that's what makes it a hard topic.

It's not strange. One is dead, one is not dead. You think it's ok to murder the one that isn't dead even though you can't really define "alive".

It's not necessarily a religious argument. I know several women, that are not religious, that are pro life. Most of those women have had an abortion and have said that they feel severe guilt and would never do it again. Some people simply view the embryo as a human life. You are letting your hatred of religion cloud your view.

You also are painting all pro-life people with a broad brush. You somehow think that abortion and school lunches (or any public assistance programs) are somehow connected. They aren't. Do you hate your neighbor's kids if you don't want to pay for their mortgage?

I'm done with this argument. If the Democrats want to make a law that allows abortion up to 20 weeks, I would fully support that. They won't, though, because they value the argument and the money that it brings them. Same goes for Republicans. At least the Republicans have put a bill forward. While not perfect, it's more than the blue team has done.

 

Functionally, how are they different besides of potential

It is typically a religious argument though. I find it odd when someone feels they should have the right to do something but that others shouldn’t.

I don’t hate religion and how you got I did by stating that the abortion debate is typically framed as a religious argument seems desperate. I do hate when religious people believe they should be able to impose their beliefs onto others though.

If I force a person to have a child they did not want then I should bare some responsibility for that child.

The bill Republicans put forward offer no concessions and only lock in a ban period that would be forced on all states. It doesn’t give women the right of bodily autonomy prior to that point.

If you are praising the bill they have put forth then you really shouldn’t call yourself pro-choice, as you are not.

 

She didn't have to be pregnant, there are ample medications readily available to prevent a pregnancy after a rape. They were told within the deadline she was pregnant and they did nothing. It was only afterwards they sudden came up with the rape story. The state needs and investigation to find out who to CHARGE with the rape not to get her an exclusion for getting a abortion. How many rapes do you believe do not get solved until long after that date? Where does their law stipulate that only after a trial and conviction of the rapist can the woman get an abortion?

The question is why haven't they been able to since day one and why is it the family that is running interference? Read the OP and news reports as to why it has been delayed. Yes there are challenges to identifying the rapist but don't you think that DNA is a VITAL and VALUABLE tool to have at their disposal? And such analysis are rather quick these days it's not like 10 year old reruns of CIS shows.

 

The mother didn't even know her daughter had been raped until she took her to the doctor for vomiting, and they found out she was pregnant. Note that rape kits require a 72 hour time window in order to collect a DNA sample, after that the next option is to collect DNA from fetal tissue.. which involves aborting the fetus, but in order to get a rape exemption from the state to allow that procedure, the state has to conduct an investigation and file a formal rape charge(note the law does not require a conviction, it requires a formal charge). The mother went to the authorities shortly after finding out her daughter had been raped, but their investigation was inconclusive. Once an abortion is ruled out, the last option to collect DNA is to do the test after the child is born. The article in the OP states that there was no DNA test done 3 days after the child was born, however an updated article reveals that they have since then done the DNA test, but the delay was not due to the family preventing them from doing a DNA test. The mother had to go to the authorities for an update before they did the DNA test

https://www.mississippifreepress.or...gives-birth-no-abortion-access-in-mississippi

 

That's not necessarily true, but it is a little bit complicated. Certainly if the fetus gets aborted, it is easy to take a DNA sample. Or if the baby is born alive.

They can take a DNA sample from a living fetus, but that is difficult, painful to the woman (involves a big gauge needle going into her abdomen), medically a little difficult and expensive, and carries a risk that it could cause the pregnancy to be aborted (maybe 0.3 to 1.5%).