- Jan 12, 2006
- 1,592
- 112
- 39
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Others
There are a few arguments for pro-choice that I have problems with as arguments themselves.
1) In the case of rape, a child would be a constant and painful reminder of the poor woman's trauma. It's given that rape is a terrible crime. However, it is not given (as far as I know) that the child conceived would in fact be an open wound so to speak. Is there evidence that in most, many, or any cases the mother would look upon her newborn child with disgust or pain because of the crime of the father? Wouldn't maternal instinct kick in with unconditional love for the child?
2) Another argument that bothers me is that the man who raped the woman would somehow be able to litigate his way into the child's life and fight for custody. Could that actually happen? If our justice system is actually that messed up, shouldn't that be fixed rather than more or less allowed for the sake of argument?
3) Argument: A woman's body, a woman's choice. Why is the choice of the growing human being ignored?
Edit:
My major problem with argument #1 is when it's used as a reason for all abortions to be legal, not just cases of rape, and by extension incest or mortal danger to the mother.
Argument #2 should not be a reality in a just legal system, and so if it happens should be its own issue, not an excuse for abortion.
I intended argument #3 as separate from rape cases and other extremes.
1) In the case of rape, a child would be a constant and painful reminder of the poor woman's trauma. It's given that rape is a terrible crime. However, it is not given (as far as I know) that the child conceived would in fact be an open wound so to speak. Is there evidence that in most, many, or any cases the mother would look upon her newborn child with disgust or pain because of the crime of the father? Wouldn't maternal instinct kick in with unconditional love for the child?
2) Another argument that bothers me is that the man who raped the woman would somehow be able to litigate his way into the child's life and fight for custody. Could that actually happen? If our justice system is actually that messed up, shouldn't that be fixed rather than more or less allowed for the sake of argument?
3) Argument: A woman's body, a woman's choice. Why is the choice of the growing human being ignored?
Edit:
My major problem with argument #1 is when it's used as a reason for all abortions to be legal, not just cases of rape, and by extension incest or mortal danger to the mother.
Argument #2 should not be a reality in a just legal system, and so if it happens should be its own issue, not an excuse for abortion.
I intended argument #3 as separate from rape cases and other extremes.
Last edited: