Alabama's Restrictive Abortion Law: Rape and Incest Discussion

Kaon · May 15, 2019

ChristianForCats said:
There are no "purposes of rape." We are arguing about the responses to rape, which is a horrible crime in the minds of everyone who knows the word.

In your opinion (of which I share) rape is a horrible crime. That is what a secular society has to say about it (besides the parenthetical) - which is why it is such an issue. Morality is subjective, so your idea of what is right won't be what others agree with.

That is because in the place of Truth, morality must exist. And, morality is subjective at best, and functional only due to social and economic pressures of consensus.

GodLovesCats · May 15, 2019

There will never be consensus in what is moral or immoral on the abortion issue. Is it always immoral due to our religious beliefs? Is the right to choose moral because of politics? What I struggle with here is even though America was founded for people who have already been born, meaning embryos and fetuses have never had the right to life, and guaranteed separation of church and state at the same time, opponents of abortion refuse to accept the Roe vs. Wade ruling as politically correct and only focus on the Bible.

JerseyChristianSuperstar · May 15, 2019

This is nothing more than the legislative fever dream of the radical right and the most extreme elements of the anti-abortion movement.

Women have bodily autonomy over what they do with their lives; abortion is not murder as it is not an unjustifiable killing a living human being, but rather a potential one, and women have this right to refuse to carry a pregnancy to term for the same reason why they have the right to refuse to donate an organ to save someone, even if it were their own child or sibling.

The ideology of the conservative movement is synonymous with division, exclusion, and misogyny, and this bill just goes to show how much misogyny the Republicans are willing to legislate to appease right-wing religious fanatics.

nonaeroterraqueous · May 15, 2019

ChristianForCats said:
Sorry SPF, but there is no reason to force a raped teenage girl to stay pregnant for nine months.

Yes, you can execute the teenage girl and she will not have to stay pregnant for nine months. That's an equally absurd proposition.

ChristianForCats said:
It just really upsets me that you keep saying the same thing about the unborn baby's moral worth and do not also express the fact that his/her mother is equally important.

If she is equally important, then she is equally deserving of execution. If we establish that both have the same worth, then the pregnancy can be terminated by killing either one, or both. Of course, we do not really want either killed, and it is you that does not place an equal worth on both, though both are human.

GodLovesCats · May 15, 2019

Well, nobody is ordered todonate an organ. People donate blood, tissues, and organs out of love.

A fetus is a living huiman, but not autonomous. It has no legal rights.

GodLovesCats · May 15, 2019

nonaeroterraqueous said:
If she is equally important, then she is equally deserving of execution. If we establish that both have the same worth, then the pregnancy can be terminated by killing either one, or both. Of course, we do not really want either killed, and it is you that does not place an equal worth on both, though both are human.

I never said the fetus has less moral worth than the mother. In fact, I said it does. The difference is I also have taken American history and government classes in high school so I understand the legal side of this. In a political thread you should expect to read opinions about how abortion fits into the U.S. Constitution.

SPF · May 15, 2019

JerseyChristianSuperstar said:
abortion is not murder as it is not an unjustifiable killing a living human being, but rather a potential one,

And of course as has been shown to you before, this is demonstrably false. You’ll need to cite a credible reference if you want anyone to seriously consider your proposition that the growing and developing human in the womb is somehow not actually living.

And I think we all acknowledge that secular laws are fluid and change. Slavery was very much a part of America’s foundation yet is there anyone here in the forum today that thinks it should still be legal? As an aside, thank goodness for the Republicans who were so adamantly against slavery.

I believe that all human beings possess equal moral worth and value regardless of their age. Therefore, I support legislation that seeks to protect the unborn human because I believe they are just as human and just as valuable as I am.

Danielwright2311 · May 15, 2019

Every child should have the right to be born, its not there fault how they became.

Punishing the child on whither it should be born or not should not be a issue.

chilehed · May 15, 2019

ChristianForCats said:
There always have been and always will be medical reasons to end a pregnant early. Denying this is a big display of ignorance.

You haven't managed to give a single example yet.

ChristianForCats said:
There has never been a law that classifies abortion as murder.

That's totally irrelevant to the nature of murder.

ChristianForCats said:
Women have always had the right to abort pregnancies in the United States.

It was legal to intentionally kill millions of innocent Jews in Nazi Germany, and it was legal to own human beings as chattel and kill them with impugnity in the US before the Civil War. Do you really think that meant that they had a right to do it?

It may be legal to murder an unborn baby, but that doesn't mean that anyone has the right to do it.

usexpat97 · May 15, 2019

What a mess. You've got rape and incest, medical reasons, different state laws, people can just travel to different states, mothers with a sure stillbirth being forced to carry it to term because of some law--and worst of all, a room full of "experts" who think they know all the ethical issues better than their own families do. This is ridiculous--the legal system simply cannot handle all this. All because some people think they are going to save the lives of some babies who are not even theirs. The only lives they're saving are the starving lawyers who get to navigate all this. Except the lawyers aren't starving, and justice-by-money wins out over family yet again.

GodLovesCats · May 15, 2019

chilehed said:
You haven't managed to give a single example yet.

Yes I have: preeclampsia. I even copied text from an article and posted a link to it.

Robert6671 · May 16, 2019

You know Incest and rape need to be in there. I would have issue with abortions being a matter off convenience. But to force a rape victim to carry there rapist child, in some state the woman actually have to share custody. And in the case of minor incest...its rape. I mean there is a girl in Ohio who is 11 and a victim of rape. Medically it would be dangerous for her to carry to term. Not impossible but still dangerous. As I said early for convenience I would be against that but as far as rape in any category to force the person to carry to term is just cruel. To force your religious or moral beliefs on someone and this is a religious moral belief is just wrong.

Danielwright2311 · May 16, 2019

Robert6671 said:
You know Incest and rape need to be in there. I would have issue with abortions being a matter off convenience. But to force a rape victim to carry there rapist child, in some state the woman actually have to share custody. And in the case of minor incest...its rape. I mean there is a girl in Ohio who is 11 and a victim of rape. Medically it would be dangerous for her to carry to term. Not impossible but still dangerous. As I said early for convenience I would be against that but as far as rape in any category to force the person to carry to term is just cruel. To force your religious or moral beliefs on someone and this is a religious moral belief is just wrong.

Every child deserves to live, so its the child's fault that she or he is a rape victim?

The law should read if the woman can not accept the child then they must adopt them out after birth.

The laws also need to change to where in this event, if rape was proven or admitted, that person has no parental rights.

CGL1023 · May 16, 2019

SPF said:
Alabama Senate passes near-total abortion ban - CNNPolitics

The Alabama law makes abortion illegal except for three exceptions:

"To avoid a serious health risk to the unborn child's mother"

For ectopic pregnancy

If the "unborn child has a lethal anomaly."

You'll see that of the exceptions, rape and incest are not among them. Opponents of the bill did attempt to have it amended to include rape and incest. Here is what Eric Johnson said below:

Eric Johnston, head of the Alabama Pro-life Coalition and the drafter of the initial legislation, told CNN "it would upend the law's legal standing.Regardless of how the conception takes place, the product is a child, and so we're saying that that unborn child is a person entitled to protection of law," he added. "So if, be it a rape or incest conception, then it would be impossible to ask a judge which of these is protected by law and which is not."

I think he's right. When it comes to the morality of abortion, the how in which a new human being comes into existence plays absolutely no role in determining their moral worth and value.

I am encouraged by this law as it being reported that through it the Supreme Court will have a chance to overturn Roe v Wade.

Jeffrey Toobin: Alabama Abortion Law is Just Following Trump's Promise of Overturning Roe Vs. Wade

Robert6671 · May 16, 2019

Contenders Edge said:
I may be breaking forum protocol by saying this, but it must be said: I do not see how anyone can call themselves a Christian and advocate for the murder of innocent lives. Kewlness, what you said, out of anything said by anyone else so far, in my opinion, is the most cold-hearted and calloused yet. I fear for your very soul and that of anyone who thinks the life of a baby in the womb is of less value than one already born.

Yes, there are different states to which those women who are hell bent on destroying the lives within their wombs, because they do not want to deal with a temporary inconvenience, will go to.

And I think I am done on this topic it is to heated a topic

In the event that Roe v. Wade is overturned, each state will be destined to decide for itself whether to protect innocent lives or to destroy them and those states that decide to preserve innocent life will either allow abortion only under unusual circumstances or outlaw it altogether. There will be some that will ban it at a certain stage of the baby’s development and there will be they who will ban it from the start.

As for any laws forcing a woman to carry a dead baby to term, I’ve heard of no such thing. That is nothing more than fearmongering and I am saying that with restraint. You do not want to know what I would be saying unrestrained.

There is no denying that a baby, even within the womb is a living soul. It should be plain to every one of us who professes to follow Christ that abortion is murder, plain and simple for which there can be no excuse, because the God who said “Thou shalt not murder” will not accept any justification for the refusal to regard the lives of those innocent babies.

Scripture warns that murderers will not inherit the kingdom of God (Rev. 21:8) and that doesn’t just include those who pull the trigger, but anyone who consciously takes part in a murder in any way, shape or form or knowingly does anything to empower an enable such wickedness. This in and of itself ought to make you tremble fearfully before your Maker. That being said, you would do well to examine yourself to see whether you really be of the faith (2 Cor. 3:15) and repent of the coldness you apparently have towards those helpless souls.

It both saddens and infuriates me that there are professors of Christ who regard the unborn as nothing more than a few pounds of flesh. Such shouldn’t even be found amongst the body of Christ and yet there is.

ChristianForCats said:
There will never be consensus in what is moral or immoral on the abortion issue. Is it always immoral due to our religious beliefs? Is the right to choose moral because of politics? What I struggle with here is even though America was founded for people who have already been born, meaning embryos and fetuses have never had the right to life, and guaranteed separation of church and state at the same time, opponents of abortion refuse to accept the Roe vs. Wade ruling as politically correct and only focus on the Bible.

Okay here it is plain in simple Christians make up about 20 percent of the planet give or take a few percet and I do consider myself one. In what fantasy do you live in were 20 percent of the planet should be to enforce there religious moral beliefs on another. There are moral laws against murder and stealing and that is universal. Religious Morals are different . There are plenty who do not believe a fetus is a human being, there are plenty who are atheist and Buddhist and shamanism hundreds of different beliefs and every one is entitled to that. Freedom of religions does not mean Freedom of Christianity and all other beliefs are secondary.
Separation of church and state is just that, I will quote Thomas Jefferson here: Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties

Danielwright2311 · May 16, 2019

Robert6671 said:
Okay here it is plain in simple Christians make up about 20 percent of the planet give or take a few percet and I do consider myself one. In what fantasy do you live in were 20 percent of the planet should be to enforce there religious moral beliefs on another. There are moral laws against murder and stealing and that is universal. Religious Morals are different . There are plenty who do not believe a fetus is a human being, there are plenty who are atheist and Buddhist and shamanism hundreds of different beliefs and every one is entitled to that. Freedom of religions does not mean Freedom of Christianity and all other beliefs are secondary.
Separation of church and state is just that, I will quote Thomas Jefferson here: Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties

So killing a potential child is ok to other people who pretend to have good moral?

I question all on this issue right here.

How is a unborn child not a child?

You call it a fetus, In truth, it is a child who is being created to be a future potential human being.

NothingIsImpossible · May 16, 2019

What is the difference between murder and abortion? One goes to prison, the other gets away with it.

Most discussions I find from the left about abortion being ok seem to come at the cost of being hypocritical. For example its not "living" despite the fact sperm itself knows to swim to the egg and fight to get inside. Seems like life to me. Or how a single-celled organism on Mars would be "life", but not a baby inside a womb. Or, my favorite.... when a woman is killed who is pregnant, its fine as its just one life lost. But if a mother animal dies while pregnant, suddenly these same people want justice for the murdered babies. Double standards. And legally speaking if a pregnant woman is killed, its considered double murder. Ironic.

HatGuy · May 16, 2019

ChristianForCats said:
There will never be consensus in what is moral or immoral on the abortion issue. Is it always immoral due to our religious beliefs? Is the right to choose moral because of politics? What I struggle with here is even though America was founded for people who have already been born, meaning embryos and fetuses have never had the right to life, and guaranteed separation of church and state at the same time, opponents of abortion refuse to accept the Roe vs. Wade ruling as politically correct and only focus on the Bible.

It's not only that it's a religious thing.

While I could argue that the philosophy of "all men are created equal" comes from Judeo-Christian values, the fact of the matter is that this is very much a secular philosophy as well. Without this Judeo-Christian value, you actually have nothing to stand on for women's rights - nevermind the rights of an unborn child. So you can't pick and choose what separation of Church and State must look like when it suits.

Plus, the Separation of Church and State has never meant that either of these are not allowed to influence each other, only that one should not control the other. They're meant to be a check-and-balance for each other. It is perfectly reasonable to believe in the separation of Church and State while looking to influence legislation in a way that lines more up to what you believe makes for a healthy society. They can't be separated so much that the secular state can go and do whatever it wants. Neither can the church do whatever it wants. They have to be a check-and-balance for each other.

The argument from your post about America being founded for people who are not born is simply untrue. America was also founded for its own future generations. The laws were created for the generations of the future, not just the present generation of its time. Surely this includes fetuses who are that future generation?

Lastly, what does it mean for something to be politically correct? That it is expedient? That it is convenient? That it is popular? That is the other issue. Because pro-choice isn't even politically correct - it does not uphold equality for all but gives the power to individuals to decide for another individual whether it has the right to live.

GodLovesCats · May 16, 2019

Danielwright2311 said:
Every child deserves to live, so its the child's fault that she or he is a rape victim?

The law should read if the woman cannot accept the child then they must adopt them out after birth.

The laws also need to change to where in this event, if rape was proven or admitted, that person has no parental rights.

Nobody said a child does not deserve to live because of how it was conceived. The law should include an excepiton for rape victims because the mother does not deserve to suffer long-term after a terrible crime. You say it was not the child's fault? Well, it is not the mother's fault either.

Danielwright2311 · May 16, 2019

ChristianForCats said:
Nobody said a child does not deserve to live because of how it was conceived. The law should include an excepiton for rape victims because the mother does not deserve to suffer long-term after a terrible crime. You say it was not the child's fault? Well, it is not the mother's fault either.

Its the mothers fault to kill a child, not the rape.

If any one kills a potential child and denied that child the right to live then you are blaming the child as the result.

Every one no mater who you are to be deserves the right to live.

Alabama's Restrictive Abortion Law: Rape and Incest Discussion

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Nonexistent Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Veteran

kewlness

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

citizen of heaven

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Some guy in a hat

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads