how is it rape if they're capable of making adult decisions?
EDIT - (in statutory rape cases)
Last edited:
General The Supreme Court has overturned Roe vs Wade.
- Thread starter John Lee Pettimore
- Start date
EDIT - (in statutory rape cases)
this gets into some weird and dicey territory with "their choice" when it comes to minors and health decisions. Should a 5 year old be able to choose her vaccinations? Sex change hormones, elective surgeries etc etc. Now i am not saying that this applies to the above instance of a raped 10 year old. but the principle in and of itself is more complicated than that.
Last edited:
Did you really just ask “how is it rape?” Adults can be raped and they make their own decisions. Your argument is making less and less sense.
You’re not staying on topic.
I am perfectly fine with carve outs for life of the mother and or viability issues that would lead to death. However eventually that fetus has a spinal cord, nervous system, can and will feel pain. I think a woman who was not raped. Who willingly engaged in the deed that always has, still does, and always will lead to babies is responsible to at least give birth to the child she conceived. We don't get to cause pain suffering and death to innocent for our irresponsibility. Strictly talking about late term abortions here. There is definitely a point during development where the life created should have a basic right to life and freedom from harm especially from the person/persons who are responsible for their creation.
Logically speaking there ain't much a difference at all between an elective abortion at 9 months and infanticide after birth.
no, my point is that (not necessarily in this rape case) in statutory rape cases it's rape because an immature/underage child can't consent - totally rational.
but you just said that a 10 yr old can make an informed medical decision about her sex organs and about the rest of her life...how is that 10 yo unable to consent to intercourse? how is that statutory rape case rational? She can't decide to have sex, but she can decide whether to carry a child to term. ?
It's just easier to say that the Dr and the parents/guardians should make the decision, just like any other private medical procedure.
body autonomy and privacy law, it's the way.
how is having a child with a lethal or quality of life genetic condition "irresponsibility"?
you have one narrative for these women, and I don't see any of that data.
a fetus is not a citizen. citizens have rights to body autonomy and privacy.
are you misunderstanding me? because i thought i clearly stated bans on late term abortions should include carve outs or allowance for life of the mother and or certain genetic conditions.
I shared two separate links with compiled data from numerous studies over the course of several decades showing the leading cause of late term abortions are purely elective involving perfectly healthy babies.
Those babies can feel and experience pain and suffering. I do not believe it to be right for anyone especially a woman who has willingly engaged in an act that directly leads to said baby to be able to kill it and cause it pain for convenience which are the majority of late term abortions. No matter how badly we want to say someone would never do that, the data speaks otherwise.
I don't think a one inch difference from one side of the vagina to the next determines your value or whether you have a right to life.
a principle or line of logic in one topic directly correlates to others.
principle of unintended consequences my friend.
let’s just leave it at that.
we have to draw the line somewhere, let's start where we all agree and work from there. There are lots genetic conditions and birth defects. Nature sucks. It's weird that you don't see sentencing someone to 12 years of pain and agony is more inhumane than simply aborting the pregnancy with a moment of self-aware-less stimulus called "pain". Pain is when you know what pain is.
but again, I'm not in favor of giving other people AKA "the government" the authority to decide what genetic conditions count or what perspective is valid.
all people have rights. body autonomy and privacy are in that list.
Are you intentionally ignoring the rest of those posts and links I shared showing that the leading cause of late term abortions are of healthy babies (ie not ones with birth defects and genetic conditions) and are not about the health of the mother.
I seriously don’t know how you can rationalize a difference between aborting a healthy baby at 9 months of pregnancy and killing it 6 months after it’s born.
outside of the it becomes a citizen nonsense you said a few posts back.
"perfectly healthy"? sorry if I missed that. I saw abortions for "fetal health"...is that kids with birth defects?
i'm not being more of an asshole than usual. I promise.
Yea on the image chart I shared that’s what it meant. Right next to that were the numbers for elective abortions late term in almost all of those studies they were equal to or greater than the fetal health category. Also this was before many states including my own expanded access to elective to all 9 months.
here’s a line from the second link I posted.
A 2013 studypublished by the pro-choice Guttmacher Institute found that fetal anomaly was not one of the primary drivers of late-term abortion. Rather, late-term abortions are usually of entirely healthy pregnancies where the woman was either unable to receive an earlier abortion (often due to a failure to recognize the pregnancy or a logistical delay) or changed her mind about keeping the child (often after a falling out with a spouse or partner).
OK, the inability to get an abortion are legit, I think you'd agree.
probably the only place we diverge is on "changed my mind".
I don't carve out exceptions to rights, unless we're going to start our "citizen" clock before birth. If that's what you think we should do, I don't think I understand exactly how that would work.
What time frame is plenty of time to get one??
Also we have limited rights for non citizens. We can’t just go around killing illegal immigrants to make our lives easier. Especially if we hired them to work in our house. (My fun little analogy to represent having willing intercourse leading to said new life)
for me I’m perfectly ok with granting a perfectly healthy fetus a right to life once it’s capable of feeling consciousness and pain.
I think any form of birth control should have taken plaice before that point.
again allowing exceptions for the life of the mother and or fetal health issues.
when does consciousness happen?
Good question and one we should use our best evidence to guess. This is where the real debate should be happening in my opinion.
I’d wager it’s right around when the brain, spinal cord, and nervous system have developed. It’s reasonable to assume what’s there has the capacity for feeling and experience. All of this becomes moot after a certain point though as loads of babies have been born premature and obviously are conscious. They are no different in the moments before they come out.
Was the ten year old a victim of statutory rape or forced rape? Either way is fucked, just struggling to understand how statutory rape got introduced into the discussion?
seems like "birth" is still a better line for a law.
it's what I assumed the situation was, as was originally reported. But I don't follow it at all, just seems like the fewer details the better.
I mean condoms, the pill, pulling out, vasectomies, tubes tied, dental dams, those weird copper implants, plan B, and loads of other birth control exist. You got a magic solution for something that will be the thing that gets people to not want/need one?
So that poor ten year old was rape raped?