Abortion is evil

[Mary Contrary 999]

Abortion is wrong always. No matter what. My thinking has evolved through the years. I think there should be exceptions for rape, when the baby will definitely not survive, or the mother's life is truly specifically threatened. Otherwise, the woman chose the situation, and must face the consequence and responsibility of gestation.

When abortion is allowed it should be solemn. The woman should experience some shame, but not always devastating life altering shame.

In regard to rape, the woman should have the right to expell what the nasty rapist put there, but it must be in the first 16 weeks. The baby does not deserve that punishment at all but it's the violent father's fault, not the woman's. We all have an extra say over what goes on in own bodies even when someone else is involved.

Well that's a start. I know how well moderate views do around her, but let me know your thoughts on this compromise.

 

[Idolater]

There isn't any justification to kill even in cases of the most violent or torturous rape. Life is life, and innocent life even more so. The child did nothing, and explaining that his or her abortion is morally pinned on the rapist doesn't change that it's really the abortionist and the mother making the final decision.

 

[Mary Contrary 999]

There isn't any justification to kill even in cases of the most violent or torturous rape. Life is life, and innocent life even more so. The child did nothing, and explaining that his or her abortion is morally pinned on the rapist doesn't change that it's really the abortionist and the mother making the final decision.

Abortion is evil. But more evil is letting a nasty brute use a woman as a vessel for his child.

 

[Mary Contrary 999]

Abortion is evil. But more evil is letting a nasty brute use a woman as a vessel for his child.

Especially when the woman is a child herself!

 

[ok doser]

Abortion is evil.

Right.
It's the murder of an innocent child.

But more evil is letting a nasty brute use a woman as a vessel for his child.

"More evil" than murdering an innocent child?

 

[Mary Contrary 999]

A child trespasser can be expelled from your property. God blesses those who nurture the trespasser. God understands those who leaves the trespasser to fate.

 

[ok doser]

A child trespasser can be expelled from your property.

Not into the arms of death.

God blesses those who nurture the trespasser.

Indeed He does.

God understands those who leaves the trespasser to fate.

Indeed He does. And He weeps.

Mary - the death of an innocent child also involves the death of the soul of the mother.

 

[Mary Contrary 999]

Not into the arms of death

But into the arms of Martha's Vineyard.

Indeed He does.

Indeed He does. And He weeps.

Yes. Yes. YES.

 

[Mary Contrary 999]

Mary - the death of an innocent child also involves the death of the soul of the mother.

Not at all when the woman is otherwise righteous.

 

[ok doser]

But into the arms of Martha's Vineyard.

Were they deliberately killed? Was there an expectation that at Martha's Vineyard the Martha's Vineyardians would deliberately kill them?

 

[ok doser]

Not at all when the woman is otherwise righteous.

No righteous woman would kill an innocent child.

 

[Rusha]

Abortion is evil. But more evil is letting a nasty brute use a woman as a vessel for his child.

Odd. So a baby created via rape is NOT an innocent, unborn child worthy of protecting?

Is that unborn baby a nasty brute like their rapist father?

 

[Rusha]

No righteous woman would kill an innocent child.

No one who is anti-abortion would devalue an innocent child based on their conception.

 

[Rusha]

A child trespasser can be expelled from your property. God blesses those who nurture the trespasser. God understands those who leaves the trespasser to fate.

In the case of abortion, the unborn child is every bit as innocent as the rape victim. Being unwanted does not make the child worthy of death.

 

[Rusha]

A child trespasser can be expelled from your property. God blesses those who nurture the trespasser. God understands those who leaves the trespasser to fate.

In reference to pregnancy, there is no such thing as “a child trespasser”. Being unplanned or unwanted doesn’t delegate an innocent child to the deliberate “fate” of abortion. God most certainly does not understands if a child dies by an *intentional* act of the mother or another person.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Abortion is wrong always. No matter what.

Then why do you contradict yourself in this very same post?

Either it's always wrong, or it's not.

My thinking has evolved through the years. I think there should be exceptions for rape,

"Abortion is wrong always" to you apparently means "not always wrong."]

Abortions for rape are cruel to the mother and the child.

The So-Called Rape "Exception" | American Right to Life

americanrtl.org

when the baby will definitely not survive,

So instead of loving the baby, caring for the baby, and doing everything possible to ease the baby's pain, you want to brutally murder the baby?

or the mother's life is truly specifically threatened.

Life of the Mother "Exception" | American Right to Life

An "exception" means a child intentionally killed. A physician should never postpone his efforts to save the mother in order to take time out to kill the child. If a doctor can only save the mother and not the child also, that is a tragedy, but it is not an intentional killing. Unintentional...

americanrtl.org

Otherwise, the woman chose the situation, and must face the consequence and responsibility of gestation.

The moment a baby is conceived inside a woman's body, she no longer has a choice in the matter.

When abortion is allowed it should be solemn.

Abortion should be banned, period!

The woman should experience some shame, but not always devastating life altering shame.

A woman who puts her child to death should be put to death, for she is a murderer. And so too should the person who performed the abortion, along with anyone who assisted him.

In regard to rape, the woman should have the right to expel what the nasty rapist put there,

But the baby needs the mother's body to survive. Who are you to deny sustenance, shelter, and safety, to the person living within her body?

but it must be in the first 16 weeks.

Such an arbitrary number...

The baby does not deserve that punishment at all but it's the violent father's fault, not the woman's.

So you want to punish the child for the crime the father committed?

Let me guess, you also oppose the death penalty for rapists, so that you kill the baby, and love the rapist?

You should love the baby, and kill the rapist, that way the child will grow up healthy, and the rapist will never be able to rape again, and not only that, but you'll deter other people from becoming rapists!

We all have an extra say over what goes on in own bodies even when someone else is involved.

But not the baby, apparently...

Well that's a start. I know how well moderate views do around her, but let me know your thoughts on this compromise.

When it comes to innocent life, there IS no compromise. If someone intentionally kills a baby, or during the commission of a crime, unintentionally causes a baby in his mother's womb to die, he should be put to death. Rapists should be put to death, while you love the baby who is conceived as a result of the crime.

Abortion is evil.

Advocating for it is evil too!

That makes YOU evil!

But more evil is letting a nasty brute use a woman as a vessel for his child.

Thus, you love the baby, and put the rapist to death, so that in the future, a person won't even consider raping a woman, because he fears losing his life.

Especially when the woman is a child herself!

Supra.

You do realize that almost exactly 50% of all humans conceived in a woman's womb are female, right? What about their lives?

 

[Mary Contrary 999]

Odd. So a baby created via rape is NOT an innocent, unborn child worthy of protecting?

Is that unborn baby a nasty brute like their rapist father?

Maybe, maybe not.

I used to think a lot like you do, but here's what changed it for me. In my neck of the woods a twelve year old was impregnated by our 43 year old town bum. Everyone said he was a harmless country bumpkin. I always knew he was a creep. He did time for shoplifting before. He comes from a family of petty thieves and most of the females on welfare.

This little girl who is actually a distant relative and her mother wanted an abortion but the father forbid it. Ended up Her child was a pathological liar and was killing neighborhood pets at eight years old. He is in juvenile hall right now. Not sure why.

You commandeer a girl's body AND corrupt her biology with human filth, that's an abomination! Sometimes heading evil off at the pass is required. And, it should be the woman's decision not the government's. All this is not so when abortion is used as birth control of course.

 

[ok doser]

Maybe, maybe not.

I used to think a lot like you do, but here's what changed it for me. In my neck of the woods a twelve year old was impregnated by our 43 year old town bum. Everyone said he was a harmless country bumpkin. I always knew he was a creep. He did time for shoplifting before. He comes from a family of petty thieves and most of the females on welfare.

In a just system of law, he would have been executed. Was he?

This little girl who is actually a distant relative and her mother wanted an abortion

The mother is evil

but the father forbid it.

Good

Ended up Her child was a pathological liar and was killing neighborhood pets at eight years old. He is in juvenile hall right now. Not sure why.

Not sure what point you're trying to make here. Are you arguing that it would have been better for him to have been killed before he was born?

You commandeer a girl's body

No the rapist did that.

AND corrupt her biology with human filth,

The rapist did that

that's an abomination!

It is and hopefully the rapist was executed

Sometimes heading evil off at the pass is required.

Sure, swift, public, painful execution is the best way to do that.

And, it should be the woman's decision not the government's.

It should be the woman's decision to murder her child, and the government should have no interest in preventing that?

 

[Rusha]

Maybe, maybe not.

I used to think a lot like you do, but here's what changed it for me. In my neck of the woods a twelve year old was impregnated by our 43 year old town bum. Everyone said he was a harmless country bumpkin. I always knew he was a creep. He did time for shoplifting before. He comes from a family of petty thieves and most of the females on welfare.

This little girl who is actually a distant relative and her mother wanted an abortion but the father forbid it. Ended up Her child was a pathological liar and was killing neighborhood pets at eight years old. He is in juvenile hall right now. Not sure why.

You commandeer a girl's body AND corrupt her biology with human filth, that's an abomination! Sometimes heading evil off at the pass is required. And, it should be the woman's decision not the government's. All this is not so when abortion is used as birth control of course.

Why label abortion evil (as in your thread title) and then go on to defend it? You have labeled the unborn child as human filth. The rapist is human filth and deserving of death. ALL rapists deserve death. Regardless, the unborn is innocent.

 

[Mary Contrary 999]

In a just system of law, he would have been executed. Was he?

No. He should have been. It was pleaded down. It was about to go to trial, and then it was over. He got like 50 years, but there is the possibility of parole earlier, but we figure it's a life sentence anyway. His health is poor and he won't last.

Not sure what point you're trying to make here. Are you arguing that it would have been better for him to have been killed before he was born?

It would have been better for that family.
The sweet little girl had no life. She was homeschooled, lost friends. A total disruption. And for what? The kid is as bad seed.

They were going to adopt him out but changed their mind. He was a cute baby and his face looked like his grand dad's. He didn't get pudgy and ornery until later. He had antisocial genes.

It should be the woman's decision to murder her child, and the government should have no interest in preventing that?

Yes the women should have been allowed to decide about a process inside the girl's body. Early on the group of human cells could be halted with no great impact to anyone. To say the boy existed at that time is foolish.

Don't get me wrong, it is a dreadful decision to have to make. To prevent a unique human from forming is repugnant. A necessary evil done in reaction to an immoral act.