The thing is after a rape would you want the lifelong reminder of such a tragic and horrible instance in your life to linger on? It is easy for a guy to say, no big deal until you are the one it affects.

If it was your wife, would you want to have her bear another man's child?

What if it was a young child of yours that was a victim, would you expect her to carry the baby to term?

On the flip side of things, could you give up a child you carried in your body for nine months?

Abortion is a horrible thing to have happen and regrettably there are times that it is justifyable though. If the mother's life is at risk or in cases of rape/incest, I think it would be cruel to not take such actions if the mother wanted to do so.

While I don't advocate abortion and think that people should be more responsible to avoid unwanted pregnancies, I would rather see a pregnancy terminated than to end up in a dumpster.

Again, I don't think that government can rightly rule over moral issues like abortion and gay marriage. These are personal and private decisions and doing so infringes on our rights and freedoms.

From what I gathered from the original story was this congressman essentially expressed that women should be prepared for rape by having birth control ready, liking it to carrying a spare tire for a vehicle. Kind of cruel.

 

Whether a rape victim adopts or not, there is always the "life-long reminder". It is called the memory of the actual evil act of rape.

I think you missed my whole sentence about adoption.

 

Of course there is going to be trauma that lasts a lifetime. I understand that part. But why make the victim relive the pain every day?

I also saw your point about adoption. The point is you cannot adopt out a fetus, you have to bring the child to term in order to adopt it out.

What I am asking you is quite simply...If your wife was a rape victim...would you want her to bring that child to term? Would you make a young girl of yours bring a child to term if the child was the result of being raped?

These things happen to people that aren't necessarily putting themselves in dangerous positions. Women and girls have been raped by intruders breaking into their homes...right their in their beds. This isn't someone asking for it or putting themselves in harm's way.

Adoption just gets rid of the child...it doesn't address the pain of carrying that child every day. It doesn't address the setback in a young child's life that may be affected by having to bring a child to term.

 

My answers would be yes to all your questions. Those are life and sometimes life sucks, but you don't kill part of your life to make it easier on you.

 

Ok so a woman that has been raped should keep the child that reminds them of the physical and emotional trauma?

I can't speak from a womans pov but I think the majority of women would terminate, if a rape resulted in pregnancy. Those of you who oppose, how many women do you know that are rape victims....ask their opinion.

 

My wife and daughter have not been rape victims but I assure you they would want to keep the baby. They hold life too sacred not to. That is my and their belief, you are welcome to yours.

Your other question, I know 2 that were raped and neither became pregnant as a result.

 

Isn't pregnancy as a result of rape a very rare occurrence? The reason I point that out is because this point of view is used to support abortion possibly to the point of overexagerration. I wonder what the stats are?

 

..............the voices inside my head.........Leonardo!....JSTHU!!!.........

Hi guys bye guys.

 

This report claims it is 5% which honestly seems kind of high but I assume it is possible. It is not something that most women plan for...well except this congressman...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8765248

 

It's why there are red haired Irish. Rape is also very dangerous because it dramatically increases the transmission rate of diseases like AIDS and HEP-C that require blood to blood transmission vectors. Rape is the reason AIDS is so prevelant in Africa.

 

No it's not.

 

Without getting into the abortion is murder or not debate. No one is going to change each others minds about weather or not it is wrong. I will make this point however.

When I was robbed, the government did not compensate me for my losses. I was forced to deal with it on my own. Fortunately, I had insurance. Regardless or weather or not my stuff was replaced, I still have to live with the memory of the incident.

When someone backed into my sisters van, and they didn't have insurance. The government didn't pay to fix her van. She was forced to deal with it herself. She sued the guy in civil court, had the girls wages garnished.

There are countless other examples I could bring up, but the fact of the matter is this. We as a society need to stop relying on Government being the solution to all our problems. We need to be personally accountable for not only our actions, but our well being. Asking the government to solve all our problems only leads to further loss of liberty, more debt, and a bleaker future for us and our children. So, in my humble opinion, the line should have been drawn in the sand long, long ago. But a late start to reducing the "nanny state" is better than no start at all.

 

Benny - that was nicely put! I honestly can't see how men/women of good will could argue against any of your points. IF, we empower individuals to take care of themselves/be responsible for their own actions, who knows what we might accomplish?

It's really a "dicey" thing though. Where do you draw the line between those who SHOULD be able to take care of themselves and, those who rightly depend on the rest of us for support?

If there IS a God, I, for one, believe this is his domain. We have no right to interject our flawed concepts.

Edit: And, I think the real answer lies between the individual and his/her God. No one else has the right to interfere.

- Jack

 

Benny you are right that people do need to look to themselves for solutions to their problems. That said, government doesn't need to be interjecting themselves in our personal lives either.

In a perfect world we would not have to worry about rape. We wouldn't have children born out of wedlock. We would have peace and harmony. All of us could chat over a root beer (alcoholism is bad).

We don't live in that perfect world. I don't care what my neighbor does in their own home. If they are two married guys, 12 people all married to each other...whatever.

As far as abortion...I find it noble that someone would want to keep the child born of rape but I know I wouldn't. This has to be a personal conviction and one shouldn't force their values onto another.

A congressman promoting a law that prohibits a PRIVATE insurance company from covering a procedure seems backwards to me.

 

I agree, the government shouldn't be allowed to prohibit what a private insurance company covers. I was directing my point to those that believe that the government should fund abortions for these cases.