What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Elections 2012: Congressional and Gubernatorial

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Elections 2012: Congressional and Gubernatorial

geezer said:
OK, just one item of food for thought, for you blood-lusters. Then I'll go away. If the mother didn't tell anyone she had been raped, but it was discovered when the child was five or ten years old that they were a product of a rape, would he or she (the child) still deserve a death sentence without trial for the crime of being so conceived? How would you recommend the killing be carried out? Knives? Poison? Hanging?
Just asking.

Does anyone think it might be more appropriate to punish the rapist?
Click to expand...
Seriously? That's a question that actually pops into your head? Do you actually expect a response or do you think this will someone stump everyone into accepting such an absurd position?
 
Re: Elections 2012: Congressional and Gubernatorial

gojackets said:
The loophole in your statement is that in your scenario the woman chose not to tell anyone that she was raped. She chose to keep the child. She had a choice. If you outlaw abortion, you are taking that choice away from people.

There will never be a law saying "If a woman gets pregnant as a result of rape--then she must abort the baby," which would make your scenario somewhat plausible. (stupid, but plausible)
Click to expand...
And that's the crux. You allow abortion, and women get choice, but babies don't get a chance to have a life.
 
geezer said:
OK, just one item of food for thought, for you blood-lusters. Then I'll go away. If the mother didn't tell anyone she had been raped, but it was discovered when the child was five or ten years old that they were a product of a rape, would he or she (the child) still deserve a death sentence without trial for the crime of being so conceived? How would you recommend the killing be carried out? Knives? Poison? Hanging?
Just asking.

Does anyone think it might be more appropriate to punish the rapist?
Click to expand...

Geezer I'll bite although I believe you're just putting on a Jerry Springer routine for us here. ;). South Park already covered this when Cartman's mom wanted to abort him and they asked how old the fetus was and she responded "he's 8 years old" to which the doctor said "so...he's 400 weeks along...abortions are only legal up to 20 weeks" causing Cartman's mom to say "well I think you need to keep your laws off my body!".
 
Re: Elections 2012: Congressional and Gubernatorial

gojackets said:
Babies in the womb are incapable of making their own decisions :) :)
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure they'd choose to live. Never have heard of a story of someone whose mom considered abortion and then chose to let the baby live and the baby, when grown, said they wish their mom had aborted them. Heard lots of stories the other direction.
 
Re: Elections 2012: Congressional and Gubernatorial

842.jpg
 
Re: Elections 2012: Congressional and Gubernatorial

Trauma to woman outweighs all other considerations (pre birth of course to apply the Cartman's Mom rule here).

Regarding Murdoch, I think he has a few less strikes against him than Akin so he may weather this. Biggest thing preventing his election is old timey Lugar voters looking for an excuse to screw him. Perhaps they've found their reason...
 
Last edited:
Re: Elections 2012: Congressional and Gubernatorial

Bob Gray said:
I'm pretty sure they'd choose to live. Never have heard of a story of someone whose mom considered abortion and then chose to let the baby live and the baby, when grown, said they wish their mom had aborted them. Heard lots of stories the other direction.
Click to expand...

Aborted babies have told you that they wish they had been born?
 
Re: Elections 2012: Congressional and Gubernatorial

Bob Gray said:
And that's the crux. You allow abortion, and women get choice, but babies don't get a chance to have a life.
Click to expand...

You don't allow choice and the woman has to go through 9 months of pregnancy, give birth, and then either give up her child for adoption or have a forever reminder of her attacker. Maybe if men actually took responsibility for their actions we wouldn't have this problem. Instead men want to take away women's options after men destroy their life.
 
Re: Elections 2012: Congressional and Gubernatorial

gojackets said:
You convieniently left off the rest of the quote..."and I think even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something God intended to happen," Mourdock said
Click to expand...

Geesh, the bad faith on here. I was only paraphrasing. (In a follow-up to that, he said "God creates life, and that was my point. God does not want rape, and by no means was I suggesting he was" -- did I also conveniently leave that out?)

But the part you quoted still doesn't change my point, which is separate from whether Mourdock is loony, or whether this bodes well or ill for either side two weeks before an election, or whether he made his argument in bad faith, or any of that; it's that there is a good faith and morally consistent argument to be made that life is life, and humans should not be in the business of ending it. This isn't even something I completely believe, especially the no death penalty part; but people I respect have made impressive arguments for it, and it has me thinking.
 
Re: Elections 2012: Congressional and Gubernatorial

gojackets said:
Aborted babies have told you that they wish they had been born?
Click to expand...
You misread what I said. Babies who were considered for abortion, but the mom chose life.

One day, just as our nation no longer considers slaves to be less human, may babies also be given full consideration.
 
Re: Elections 2012: Congressional and Gubernatorial

DaveStPaul said:
Geesh, the bad faith on here. I was only paraphrasing. (In a follow-up to that, he said "God creates life, and that was my point. God does not want rape, and by no means was I suggesting he was" -- did I also conveniently leave that out?)

But the part you quoted still doesn't change my point, which is separate from whether Mourdock is loony, or whether this bodes well or ill for either side two weeks before an election, or whether he made his argument in bad faith, or any of that; it's that there is a good faith and morally consistent argument to be made that life is life, and humans should not be in the business of ending it. This isn't even something I completely believe, especially the no death penalty part; but people I respect have made impressive arguments for it, and it has me thinking.
Click to expand...
You're correct. It's simply logical that of a person believes that life is life at conception, it's life at conception regardless of how the conception took place. But, logic has little application in this arena.
 
Re: Elections 2012: Congressional and Gubernatorial

Bob Gray said:
You misread what I said. Babies who were considered for abortion, but the mom chose life.

One day, just as our nation no longer considers slaves to be less human, may babies also be given full consideration.
Click to expand...

Sure. As soon as men stop raping women.
 
Re: Elections 2012: Congressional and Gubernatorial

bronconick said:
http://www.mattbors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/842.jpg
Click to expand...
There's lots of pro-life cartoons I could put up. Saw one recently with the caption "No, no Barack, you're supposed to KISS the babies."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top