Alabama's Restrictive Abortion Law: Rape and Incest Discussion

GodLovesCats

Well-Known Member
Mar 16, 2019
7,401
1,328
47
Florida
✟117,917.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Yes, but you did a better job making their argument civil than when you try to push your theology on me. Why is that?

BTW that picture is a rally at the state Capitol protesting the new law. "Stop the War On Women" is good. Would you agree even as a pro-life Christian?
 
Upvote 0

S.O.J.I.A.

Dynamic UNO
Nov 6, 2016
4,280
2,641
Michigan
✟98,714.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single
it would upend the law's legal standing

I would agree with this.

the same logic that would say it's ok for someone to abort their child due to rape because of inconvenience and health risks can also be applied to the oopsy of a one night stand.

we'd pretty much be back to square one of abortion being completely legal under any circumstances.
 
Upvote 0

GodLovesCats

Well-Known Member
Mar 16, 2019
7,401
1,328
47
Florida
✟117,917.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
I would agree with this.

The same logic that would say it's OK for someone to abort their child due to rape because of inconvenience and health risks can also be applied to the oopsy of a one night stand.

We'd pretty much be back to square one of abortion being completely legal under any circumstances.

Every abortion thread I have posted in has a clear explanation of why doing it for rape victims is not only because the baby would be inconvenient. People who continue to deny this are unwilling to think about it. If you choose to think about the moral value and needs of the raped mother instead of just her kid inside, who is not more worthy of anything than she is in God's eyes except a move to heaven without salvation, you will understand why an exception for rape and incest victims is important. But no, people won't listen to that, or else I would only have to say it once in each thread.

In no way is discussing this reason for abortion going back to square one. It is the same debate that a lot of people argued about in the early 1970s.
 
Upvote 0

Servant of Yeshua

Active Member
Jan 17, 2019
123
70
Northern Hemisphere
✟14,613.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
You know I was done with this topic. Let me be real with you man. If my daughter is raped and she wants an abortion I would support. And I would track down the rapist and make the guy could never make a child again. I pointed at a case of an 11 year old girl being raped in Ohio...now could she carry to term maybe but there is a good possibility there will be complications. You know it is that attitude...it is why I do not go to church anymore. I am a Christian...but I can stand judgmental bigots who act like they know it all. The bible does not make issue on abortion. So your belief is not a religious law...it is A PERSONAL MORAL OPINION AND KNOW ONE HAS THE RIGHT TO FORCE THERE OPINION OR BELIEFS ONTO ANOTHER!!! I mean I swear it is Muslims and Christians that do this is it why Christians and Muslims are the two most hated groups in the world.
This topic has zero to do with "church". I personally think "church" today is nothing like it is supposed to be. It was never meant to be this movie theater type situation. Studying the bible and worshipping in intimate groups and praying at homes and inviting our neighbors. Not in buildings where most all of the tithes are going toward the building and staff salaries. But God will not give anyone slack just because they were mistreated by "church" when He knows you have His word to trust. The sad truth is that God has been made very small and He is not being seen as the ONLY person who has the right to create or destroy life. Of course I would love my daughter no matter what she decided to do. But I would BEG her to please consider that God is much greater than she can imagine and that He will bless her for obeying Him and then on the contrary, she may suffer consequences for making God too small and not trusting Him in His word and not stopping a heartbeat. Jeremiah 1:5 says that God KNEW this child before He formed him or her in the womb. Hate is not telling someone biblical truth when eternity could be at stake. Also remember the following which have helped me ( I was horribly sexually abused from ages 7-9 yrs) Romans 12:21 " Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. " Romans 12:19 "Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath; for it is written: "Vengeance is Mine; I will repay,saith the Lord."
and lastly Ezekiel 33:11 "Say to them, As I live, declares the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live; turn back, turn back from your evil ways".
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

SPF

Well-Known Member
Feb 7, 2017
3,594
1,984
ATL
✟142,081.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Every abortion thread I have posted in has a clear explanation of why doing it for rape victims is not only because the baby would be inconvenient
The point is that aborting an otherwise healthy child because of rape is not abortions a child due to a life threatening medical emergency.

What you seem to be continually failing to connect is that the HOW in which a new human being comes into existence has no bearing on their moral value.

And the morality of abortion stands or falls with how we understand the moral worth and value of the unborn.
 
Upvote 0

SPF

Well-Known Member
Feb 7, 2017
3,594
1,984
ATL
✟142,081.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
What does the "how" have to do with my argument that the fetus and mother are equals in God's eyes? I was criticizing people who think unborn babies are more important than their mothers.
Because you're not being consistent. Out of one side of your mouth you're saying that the mother and the fetus are of equal value. Then with the other side you're saying it's OK to kill the unborn in the case of rape. I'm not sure why you're not seeing the inconsistency.

When a rape occurs and the woman becomes pregnant against her will, there are two victims. The mother is a victim, and the unborn, unwanted child is the victim. Why do you think it is morally appropriate to kill one of the victims?

Imagine that two women were kidnapped and held hostage for 5 years. During this 5 year ordeal, they are repeatedly abused in many horrific ways. After 5 years, the policy manage to catch the man and free the women.

There is a lot of media coverage, and one of the women, Jane, wants the whole mess to go away. She's very private, her life has been ruined, she has endured and experienced horrific violations and doesn't think she will ever fully recover. She wants to try and move on with life.

Mary, the other woman on the other hand, is willing to talk about it. In fact, she's talking about it a lot. She's doing interviews, she's writing a book, and come to find out, she's getting paid well for these things. The problem is that Mary's actions are really affecting Jane. Jane can't go out without getting bombarded by the media. Paparazzi are everywhere, news vans are everywhere. She's had to change her phone number, she's realizing that she's going to have to move.

Mary is making Jane literally relive the horrible events on a daily basis. Because of Mary's actions, Jane feels trapped, and basically in prison. She has literally lost her right to liberty because she can't go anywhere so long as Mary is keeping their ordeal in the spotlight. Mary calls Jane and asks her to stop. Jane refuses, saying that the media will move on and forget about them in about 9 months, and she wants to use the little time she has to try and make as much money as possible.

There's your scenario. Here's the question - Would it be morally appropriate for Jane to kill Mary?

If we actually believe that the unborn child is just as much a human being with just as much moral worth and value, and just as much the right to live as we do, then the analogy should make sense.
 
Upvote 0

GodLovesCats

Well-Known Member
Mar 16, 2019
7,401
1,328
47
Florida
✟117,917.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
The point that is not getting across to you is I would never recommend abortion to a rape victim, but just want the choice to be available as a last resort where she can't get gynecological/obstetric care and other services. As long as medical, psychological, and social services and programs are not easily accessible for rape victims who learn they are pregnant, they need the right to have abortions up to a certain fetal age. It is not about a belief that the fetus has less moral worth and value, but the lack of help mothers can get because abortion bans are being passed without helping them.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

SPF

Well-Known Member
Feb 7, 2017
3,594
1,984
ATL
✟142,081.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
they need the right to have abortions up to a certain fetal age
Why? What is it about a "certain fetal age" that has any bearing whatsoever on the morality of abortion?

The implicit implication in your position is that the unborn, unwanted victim does not have the same right to life that the mother does.

You're literally saying that since the mother may not be able to receive first world level prenatal care that she ought to therefore be able to kill another innocent person.
 
Upvote 0

GodLovesCats

Well-Known Member
Mar 16, 2019
7,401
1,328
47
Florida
✟117,917.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Actually I am saying in many places women and girls have no access to any care they need, so states are working backwards by banning abortions without providing assistance to rape victims. If they want to ban abortions even in cases of rape and incest, they have an obligation to provide for the mothers, and that is not happening.
 
Upvote 0

SPF

Well-Known Member
Feb 7, 2017
3,594
1,984
ATL
✟142,081.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Actually I am saying in many places women and girls have no access to any care they need, so states are working backwards by banning abortions without providing assistance to rape victims. If they want to ban abortions even in cases of rape and incest, they have an obligation to provide for the mothers, and that is not happening.
You do realize that what you're saying is that since the state isn't providing adequate support for rape victims that it is therefore acceptable for them to kill their babies.

Making abortion illegal is the right thing to do because abortion is immoral. That is true in and of itself. Whatever governmental support you believe the government should be responsible to provide is an entirely different subject.

But to sit here and say that because the government isn't paying for prenatal care that it therefore makes it OK for someone to kill their baby is honestly absurd when you think about it.
 
Upvote 0

(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 14, 2015
6,132
3,089
✟405,713.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
What? How can you possibly think something growing inside her body, half made of her own cells and her own chronosomes, NOT BE HERS?
Do you have children? If so, do you have the right to take their lives for any reason or no reason at all because half of their DNA came from you? Of course, the answer is no. So how can you justify that the geographical location of an individual determines their right to live? By the way, it is "someone" growing inside her body, not "something."
 
Upvote 0

GodLovesCats

Well-Known Member
Mar 16, 2019
7,401
1,328
47
Florida
✟117,917.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Do you have children? If so, do you have the right to take their lives for any reason or no reason at all because half of their DNA came from you? Of course, the answer is no. So how can you justify that the geographical location of an individual determines their right to live? By the way, it is "someone" growing inside her body, not "something."

Actualy it is the biological location we are talking about. If I had an ectopic pregnancy, someone would be unable to develop into a viable, newborn baby. In that case, I would have a hard time keeping him/her all 9 months because it is a big health risk for two people. If the baby is born pretmaturely via induced labor I don't know how I would feel because there are so many variables. I never have been or will be pregnant in my life.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Archivist

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Mar 5, 2004
17,332
6,425
Morgantown, West Virginia, USA
✟571,140.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Because you're not being consistent. Out of one side of your mouth you're saying that the mother and the fetus are of equal value. Then with the other side you're saying it's OK to kill the unborn in the case of rape. I'm not sure why you're not seeing the inconsistency.

When a rape occurs and the woman becomes pregnant against her will, there are two victims. The mother is a victim, and the unborn, unwanted child is the victim. Why do you think it is morally appropriate to kill one of the victims?

Imagine that two women were kidnapped and held hostage for 5 years. During this 5 year ordeal, they are repeatedly abused in many horrific ways. After 5 years, the policy manage to catch the man and free the women.

There is a lot of media coverage, and one of the women, Jane, wants the whole mess to go away. She's very private, her life has been ruined, she has endured and experienced horrific violations and doesn't think she will ever fully recover. She wants to try and move on with life.

Mary, the other woman on the other hand, is willing to talk about it. In fact, she's talking about it a lot. She's doing interviews, she's writing a book, and come to find out, she's getting paid well for these things. The problem is that Mary's actions are really affecting Jane. Jane can't go out without getting bombarded by the media. Paparazzi are everywhere, news vans are everywhere. She's had to change her phone number, she's realizing that she's going to have to move.

Mary is making Jane literally relive the horrible events on a daily basis. Because of Mary's actions, Jane feels trapped, and basically in prison. She has literally lost her right to liberty because she can't go anywhere so long as Mary is keeping their ordeal in the spotlight. Mary calls Jane and asks her to stop. Jane refuses, saying that the media will move on and forget about them in about 9 months, and she wants to use the little time she has to try and make as much money as possible.

There's your scenario. Here's the question - Would it be morally appropriate for Jane to kill Mary?

If we actually believe that the unborn child is just as much a human being with just as much moral worth and value, and just as much the right to live as we do, then the analogy should make sense.
Gee, is Mary inside of Jane, using her body?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 person
Upvote 0

(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 14, 2015
6,132
3,089
✟405,713.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Actualy it is the biological location we are talking about. If I had an ectopic pregnancy, someone would be unable to develop into a viable, newborn baby. In that case, I would have a hard time keeping him/her all 9 months because it is a big health risk for two people. If the baby is born pretmaturely via induced labor I don't know how I would feel because there are so many variables. I never have been or will be pregnant in my life.
Baby inside the body = no human rights. Baby outside the body = human rights. It is like the key to real-estate. Location, location, location. But apparently the point that you are trying to make is that DNA gives a parent the right to terminate their children. So theoretically, you should have the right to kill of your offspring anytime you want...right?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 14, 2015
6,132
3,089
✟405,713.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Gee, is Mary inside of Jane, using her body?
Below are pictures of the children who were conceived when their mothers were raped. Would you look them in the eye and tell them that their lives are not as valuable as yours because their fathers were rapists? Did they deserve to die?
Children Born Of Rape Pose To Show That They’re Beautiful And Can Be Loved Too
child 2.jpg
child 3.jpg
child 4.jpg
child 5.jpg
child 6.jpg
child.jpg
 
Upvote 0