Abortion is never justifiable, even in rape cases

[Piggus]

4) If you think women can't be rapists, you're not properly informed and should read this article too.

That is completely irrelevant.

Because those 2 articles are about men being raped by MEN, when I was referring to the rapist being a WOMAN.

Big difference there, so can you show me some cases of where women are raping men?

That's not very likely now is it.

 

[fantome profane]

Hey, the troll is back! Awesome!

If you feed them they will never go away.

 

[Thana]

That is completely irrelevant.

Because those 2 articles are about men being raped by MEN, when I was referring to the rapist being a WOMAN.

Big difference there, so can you show me some cases of where women are raping men?

That's not very likely now is it.

Lol. Seriously?
I mean, Seriously?

x 1000000000

 

[Piggus]

Show me an example then.

Can you do that?

Looks like you cannot, but congrats, you can post a facepalm.

 

[Quintessence]

Lol. Seriously?
I mean, Seriously?

x 1000000000

Yeah, it's pretty clear they didn't bother reading the links I posted given they do talk about women raping men. It's not common, but it's also likely it's severely underreported given the taboo. It wouldn't surprise me if some people who aren't flagrant trolls truly do believe women don't rape men. It's not true, though I wish it were. Frankly, I wish rape didn't exist, period.

 

[Me Myself]

I can see the effect rape has on a person.
You can't really see the effect abortion has on the baby.

Yu said that we cannot judge someone if we are not there. That is what you said. You said lacking such "information" about their emotional state we cannot say if the act is immoral.ñ


According to such logic, you wont know if raping is immoral until you truly do get a big urge to rape. Not only a urge to rape though. But a urge similar to that of the rapist to be judged in question. Whether this is because of the rapist having had a terrible childhood or whathave you.

Your position for sufficient information for moral judgement is terrible.

 

[Me Myself]

Yeah, it's pretty clear they didn't bother reading the links I posted given they do talk about women raping men. It's not common, but it's also likely it's severely underreported given the taboo. It wouldn't surprise me if some people who aren't flagrant trolls truly do believe women don't rape men. It's not true, though I wish it were. Frankly, I wish rape didn't exist, period.

Indeed.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Not much, I find it insteresting that your last resource of discussion is "well, you disagree with me, so its just subjective"



Yes, morality is subjective. By that same token the rapist is subjectively a hero and the victim totally diserved it

That's your definition of 'subjective'?
It doesn't actually mean that an indefensible position suddenly becomes reality. It means that peoples morals are informed by their own reality, history, and beliefs.

So, does your reality, history and/or beliefs lead you to think the rapist is subjectively a hero and the victim totally deserved it?

Really?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

By the way, how can you know rape is bad? Have you considered the rapists poiint of view?

I believe that unless you have personally raped someone you are speaking from ignorance.

Ughh...as attempts to draw an analogy goes, this misses the mark. Posting random crap you don't actually believe in is hardly supportive of your viewpoint. Can you defend rape, on a subjective level? Please...be my guest. Abortion can be defended, even if you don't agree with said defence.

 

[Me Myself]

Ughh...as attempts to draw an analogy goes, this misses the mark. Posting random crap you don't actually believe in is hardly supportive of your viewpoint. Can you defend rape, on a subjective level? Please...be my guest. Abortion can be defended, even if you don't agree with said defence.

Anything can be defended on a subjective level. Neither of us will believe the point because neither of us do, but for many years men were not guilty of rape, the woman was the most guilty one.

The point there though stopped being about abortion but about taking into consideration the state of mind of someone to see if the act is immoral or not.

That in itself is a disastrously fundamentally flawed stance from where to try to defend your point.

I can understand (and disagree) saying the baby is not a person.

I can understand (and disagree) saying that the woman's "control" over her body is more important than the life of the unborn (and disagree)

But it is completely inconsecuential to the evaluation of the morality of an act ( and act, not a person) the kind of emotional state the person indulging in it was at.

No matter how heartborken you are or whatever, drinking while driving is immoral, dangerous to others and stupid. Yes, maybe I would have done it or do it if e circumstance was terrible enough ( lets hope that never happens) but the fact that someone can understand me drinking and driving because idk, my whole family was murdered and the killer raped the corpses, has no bearing on the fact that drinking and driving can cause the death of innocent people, and as such is a completely idiotic way to judge the morality of the act.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Anything can be defended on a subjective level. Neither of us will believe the point because neither of us do, but for many years men were not guilty of rape, the woman was the most guilty one.

The point there though stopped being about abortion but about taking into consideration the state of mind of someone to see if the act is immoral or not.

That in itself is a disastrously fundamentally flawed stance from where to try to defend your point.

I can understand (and disagree) saying the baby is not a person.

I can understand (and disagree) saying that the woman's "control" over her body is more important than the life of the unborn (and disagree)

But it is completely inconsecuential to the evaluation of the morality of an act ( and act, not a person) the kind of emotional state the person indulging in it was at.

No matter how heartborken you are or whatever, drinking while driving is immoral, dangerous to others and stupid. Yes, maybe I would have done it or do it if e circumstance was terrible enough ( lets hope that never happens) but the fact that someone can understand me drinking and driving because idk, my whole family was murdered and the killer raped the corpses, has no bearing on the fact that drinking and driving can cause the death of innocent people, and as such is a completely idiotic way to judge the morality of the act.

Hmmm...I wonder if I've taken this out of context. Skim reading and all that.

I'll reread the relevant sections of the thread again when time allows, although that's unlikely to be tonight. In any case, I am at least allowing for the possibility I went off half-arsed without understanding the full reasoning behind your comments.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Anything can be defended on a subjective level. Neither of us will believe the point because neither of us do, but for many years men were not guilty of rape, the woman was the most guilty one.

The point there though stopped being about abortion but about taking into consideration the state of mind of someone to see if the act is immoral or not.

That in itself is a disastrously fundamentally flawed stance from where to try to defend your point.

I can understand (and disagree) saying the baby is not a person.

I can understand (and disagree) saying that the woman's "control" over her body is more important than the life of the unborn (and disagree)

But it is completely inconsecuential to the evaluation of the morality of an act ( and act, not a person) the kind of emotional state the person indulging in it was at.

No matter how heartborken you are or whatever, drinking while driving is immoral, dangerous to others and stupid. Yes, maybe I would have done it or do it if e circumstance was terrible enough ( lets hope that never happens) but the fact that someone can understand me drinking and driving because idk, my whole family was murdered and the killer raped the corpses, has no bearing on the fact that drinking and driving can cause the death of innocent people, and as such is a completely idiotic way to judge the morality of the act.

I've read back a couple of times and have actually got more confused than anything.
Rather than responding directly to points raised (by various posters) I might just briefly outline my thoughts.

1) Morals are subjective
2) There is a natural human inclination to understand things from their own worldview and perspective. Empathy can help correct this, or occasionally over correct it, but it never makes the issue disappear completely.
3)1 & 2 together would suggest moral differences brought about by different backgrounds. Gender and religion seem key in discussions of abortion.
4) Whilst our morals are somewhat unavoidably shaped by experience, our state of mind at a particular time has more impact on how we relate to our morals than to the morals themselves.
5) Personally (for what its worth) l am pro-choice, with some limitations. Religious backgrounds aside, I've rarely met anyone who is not, with the important provision that there are HUGE differences in what "limitations" means.

Hmmm...dunno if that helps, but there you have it.

 

[Sunstone]

Anyone who thinks a fetus is a person should try flying a plane that is only partly built.

 

[Philomath]

The OP is the fastest person I've ever seen get banned on here.

 

[Sonofason]

You don't think semantics are important, but use the most sensationalist and medically inaccurate term you could go with? Interesting...

Child murderers should be punished. And severely. But abortion of a pre-viability fetus is different, in my mind. Obviously not in yours. As for the Lord, he can let me know his opinion any time he sees fit.

Actually, I believe that it is very wrong for a person to even consider abortion. I cannot think of a single justification for putting innocent unborn children to death, and depriving them of their life. But I cannot call it murder. Murder is the illegal killing of another human being. Abortion is legal. If it is conceivable that My God is capable of forgiving a woman for putting her own child to death, then perhaps I could show some compassion for such a person myself.

If it is against God's will that a woman should kill her own child, and if there should be a punishment ascribed to such a person, then I must leave it in the hands of God.

 

[Me Myself]

I've read back a couple of times and have actually got more confused than anything.
Rather than responding directly to points raised (by various posters) I might just briefly outline my thoughts.

1) Morals are subjective
2) There is a natural human inclination to understand things from their own worldview and perspective. Empathy can help correct this, or occasionally over correct it, but it never makes the issue disappear completely.
3)1 & 2 together would suggest moral differences brought about by different backgrounds. Gender and religion seem key in discussions of abortion.
4) Whilst our morals are somewhat unavoidably shaped by experience, our state of mind at a particular time has more impact on how we relate to our morals than to the morals themselves.
5) Personally (for what its worth) l am pro-choice, with some limitations. Religious backgrounds aside, I've rarely met anyone who is not, with the important provision that there are HUGE differences in what "limitations" means.

Hmmm...dunno if that helps, but there you have it.

I agree points one and two, I either dont inderstand three and four or am too confused about their relevance to the discssion. Maybe both

 

[Me Myself]

Anyone who thinks a fetus is a person should try flying a plane that is only partly built.

You could use the same analogy for toddlers.

 

[averageJOE]

Actually, I believe that it is very wrong for a person to even consider abortion. I cannot think of a single justification for putting innocent unborn children to death, and depriving them of their life. But I cannot call it murder. Murder is the illegal killing of another human being. Abortion is legal. If it is conceivable that My God is capable of forgiving a woman for putting her own child to death, then perhaps I could show some compassion for such a person myself.

If it is against God's will that a woman should kill her own child, and if there should be a punishment ascribed to such a person, then I must leave it in the hands of God.

If some person who is a complete stranger to you was dying and the only way so save this person's life was a bone marrow transplant and you were that person's only match should you be forced to make the donation and get stuck with the bill? Knowing full well that if you refuse that the person will die?

 

[Sonofason]

But every sperm and egg could well be a life, but they ain't, just because an egg is fertilized doesn't mean it is already a human, or life as we know it, there is so many other stages that it must go through.

My friend, a fertilized egg is indeed "life as we know it." A fertilized egg of a female human being is a human being. It's not a child, and it's not an adult, but it is certainly human. It's DNA is human, and it is alive. It doesn't have the DNA of a dead person. It's got the DNA of a living person. It's not a corpse. It's alive, and it's human. It's a tiny innocent and helpless human being.

 

[Sonofason]

You did too mention rape.

If a rapist raped your wife would you raise the rapist’s child that raped your wife?

Or tell her to have an abortion.

I thought it was up to the woman?