You repeatedly post , ""rape is being used as the reason to justify all abortions"" when NO one has said that and YOU have NEVER provided proof they did. Why do you keep posting that when you've been shown that is not used to to justify all abortions? Seems an odd thing to do....
How she got pregnant is irrelevant because it does not change the nature of a fetus. A fetus is a fetus and fetuses have no rights. Abortion is great.
Well .. in the case of Rape .. Abortion happens well before the Fetus Stage .. should not even get to the zygote stage. So yes .. abortion in this instance is "Great" .. and as God has ordained
Great! But, women who are raped or experience incest do not necessarily take this action within the legal limit that state legislatures decree. And, I don't see these legislatures that are so focused on running women's bodies solving this. For example, they are not legislating programs for ensuring that women in these cases are provided the information and continuing healthcare to ensure they are making their decision within the limits decreed. In fact, they are pretty much assaulting Planned Parenthood and other such groups that know how to manage such situations.
True - and we have GOP morons still beating this horse .. which unfortunately is not dead. These states using 6 weeks as the bar is Preposterously anti-Science - anti -logic - anti liberty .. which is what you get when you have law on the basis of the religious political bandwagon.
Some people think rape babies are worthless and not worthy of life. Just because of the circumstances of their conception.
Is it that much more absurd than the bar Pro-Abortion states are using? (which is practically up to the moment of birth - and then even a little later, if they could)
How about she can apply for special exception and explain why it's not her fault. Allowing (later-term) abortions on little girls with no reporting will just open up the door for incest to continue - and for the girl to become impregnated over and over again. Surely something that neither Pro-choicers nor Pro-Lifers want. For a regular rape victim, sorry, if she waits long enough, she has some fault in this. You'd think rape victims should be able to get their abortions even sooner than other women.
Maybe, but that isn't even close to the issue at hand. The fact of being raped and having abortion denied means that the woman pays a LIFE LONG penalty for the crime of her attacker. That includes the continuing psychological damage inherent in violent assaults - damage that can be severe. Beyond that, not everyone shares you view of zygotes, nor sees you or the State as having dominion over every woman's body, religion, etc.
But she WAITED. (Or in the case if incest, she's just going to continue to get raped again and again, so how is abortion really going to be much of a solution to her, if that abortion is not reported)
You need to do better than that. What legislation against women are you supporting? And, what states with draconian law is interested in your legislative idea? I do not see any validity in what "you'd think rape victims" would do. The reason is that we already KNOW what they do.
If you wait long enough, no abortion for you. There is no reason an exception should be made to that due to rape.
You're still hoping people will do what you think you would do, and thus you think making laws against anything else is find. That's not a valid argument. And, your comment about incest demonstrates a clear lack of understanding of the situation in real life.
Only 1% of abortions are due to rape. Do we allow the other 99% just for the benefit of that 1%, so they can get abortions later, even though they really shouldn't need to? 99 fetuses will die just so that one woman - who was raped - can kill her fetus even though she should have (if she was going to do it) aborted months earlier?
I agree. The fact of the matter is that the state has NO WAY of deterring whether rape occurred. All women have every right to autonomy over their bodies.
This post makes NO sense to me. In Texas, we see that failure to support RvW means that the state gets to focus vigilantes on women who might even consider abortion as well as those who help in any way.
Please cite. But, please remember that denying abortion to rape victims does not give you the right to override the right to bodily autonomy.
Because YOU said so? Sorry. You don't have the right to control women's bodies. This is true pretty much throughout medicine.
She's sharing her body during a pregnancy. You don't think a woman has the right to take drugs that might due permanent damage to her baby, do you?
There is a glaring problem with the idea that the state should decide this for women - as stated above.
