Is it sin for a rape victim to abort the fetus?

[Harbal]

These folks pouring over the border become enslaved by subhuman wages, and abuse.

Oh, that's what Trump meant when he said he was going to build a wall to stop criminals and murderers getting into the USA. He was concerned about the conditions they might have to live under. Or did he mean it how it sounded, which would at least make him more honest than you. And to be a bigger liar than Trump takes some doing.

[henry quirk]

What is it that you think I'm failing to take a stand on, henry?

In context: abortion.

You don't think a pregnant woman carries a person: fair enough.

You don't think a man ought tell a woman anything about what she does with her body: fair enough.

Even though you don't believe a pregnant woman carries a person, you wouldn't disagree with someone who does: fair enough.

Altogether, though: it amounts to a go along to get along, go with the flow, don't rock the boat non-position.

-----

civil rights.

Yeah, I see the problem between us. See, when I talk about morality I'm not talkin' about civil rights or legislation or things men craft in state houses. When I talk about morality I'm talkin' about a person havin' an inalienable claim to his, and no other's life, liberty, and property. In this context: a woman has an absolute right to do with herself as chooses, but, without *just cause, she has no right to do with another as she chooses becuz that other belongs to himself; his life, liberty, and property are inalienably his (even if he's in her womb), not hers.

To take a person's life (in the womb or out) without *just cause is murder, in a sense it's the ultimate theft, and this stands as fact no matter what a legislature or judiciary has to say on the subject.

Life, liberty, and property (and a person's right to his and no other's) do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.

-----

Women don't need men telling them anything.

Apparently, according to you, women, not a one, had any sense that mebbe aborting was offing a person, or does this...

I doubt that it was considered murder until men and religion got involved.

...have some arcane, alternate meaning?

Considering there are many ways to view life and nature, do you think that a person is only moral if they think as you do?

The legit basis for morality I lay out just above in my response to Walker. Practically it means it's wrong to kill without *just cause, wrong to steal, wrong to rape, wrong to slave, wrong to coerce, wrong to defraud, wrong to abuse. That's my morality. I reckon it's yours too.




*self-defense, defense of another

[FlashDangerpants]

Yeah, I see the problem between us. See, when I talk about morality I'm not talkin' about civil rights or legislation or things men craft in state houses.

That's not really true, Henry only has about two sentences in his entire code and the second one is about the lawful reasons under which a man may be stripped of his property. It's a legalistic theory that he's tried to expand out to an entire philosophy and that doesn't work very well even for talented philosophers.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

So'called 'morality' consists of anything the individual chooses for it to consist of. There are many people who think that sex without marriage is 'immoral'. That not covering one's hair is 'immoral'. That showing your ankles is 'immoral'. That wearing a hat in church is 'immoral'. That having sex with someone of the same sex is 'immoral'. That having an opinion is 'immoral'..... Human's are too stupid to be trusted with such concepts (as proven by the forum religiomorons like IC and his quartet of abominations).

[Lacewing]

Apparently, according to you, women, not a one, had any sense that mebbe aborting was offing a person

People have different views, Henry. I do not speak for all women -- and neither should anyone.

As you know, all forms of life go through many stages before being born. All forms of life may purposefully abort for all kinds of reasons. Stop being melodramatic in regard to the cells that turn into a human form.

I can say with absolute honesty and love and understanding, if my parents didn't want me to be born to them for any reason, I would have no issue with that. I wouldn't want my birth/earthly-existence to be forced on them. If 'I' (my soul or whatever) was intent on being born on Earth, there are likely other ways. What difference does it make when and how?

Maybe if you weren't such a separatist and could consider how everything is naturally made up of energy constantly changing form, you wouldn't champion such rigid manmade ideas about what life is or should be.

Let people make their own decisions for the natural bodily processes that they are personally involved in. You of all people should support that. It's really very telling that you don't.

[reasonvemotion]

Born by default rather than design.
What are the rights of the rapist father?
Excerpt from an article Social Work Today U.K. 14/12/21

Currently, any man who fathers a child through rape can apply and gain parental responsibility for that child.

This means, for example, if the mother decides to give the child up, the father has a right to say that they want that child to be with them.

A convicted rapist has the right to be notified of care proceedings, to information about the child, and to be involved in any important decisions about the upbringing of this child.

Ultimately the law has to come up with a decision, but for social workers, Goddard says: “if you are looking for answers, you are in the wrong place because this is greyer than anything else you will cover.”

[henry quirk]

So, yow asked twice...

So... a person is only 'moral' if they think like you do?

do you think that a person is only moral if they think as you do?

...and I answered...

The legit basis for morality I laid out...in ^my response to Walker. Practically it means it's wrong to kill without *just cause, wrong to steal, wrong to rape, wrong to slave, wrong to coerce, wrong to defraud, wrong to abuse. That's my morality. I reckon it's yours too.

^See, when I talk about morality I'm not talkin' about civil rights or legislation or things men craft in state houses. When I talk about morality I'm talkin' about a person havin' an inalienable claim to his, and no other's life, liberty, and property. In this context: a woman has an absolute right to do with herself as chooses, but, without *just cause, she has no right to do with another as she chooses becuz that other belongs to himself; his life, liberty, and property are inalienably his (even if he's in her womb), not hers.

To take a person's life (in the womb or out) without *just cause is murder, in a sense it's the ultimate theft, and this stands as fact no matter what a legislature or judiciary has to say on the subject.

Life, liberty, and property (and a person's right to his and no other's) do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.


*self-defense, defense of another

I was thinkin' you'd have some comment, some counter, to offer.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

How insulting, to NOT be on Henry's ignore list. What did Lacewing do to deserve that dishonour?

[Lacewing]

I was thinkin' you'd have some comment, some counter, to offer.

You think a lot of things and ignore a lot of things. Not worth messing with sometimes.

[henry quirk]

I was thinkin' you'd have some comment, some counter, to offer.

You think a lot of things and ignore a lot of things. Not worth messing with sometimes.

So: next time you ask, I won't waste my time with an answer.

[Harbal]

Even though you don't believe a pregnant woman carries a person, you wouldn't disagree with someone who does: fair enough.

Altogether, though: it amounts to a go along to get along, go with the flow, don't rock the boat non-position.

You misunderstood what I wrote there, henry; I could probably have said it more clearly. I meant that I wouldn't call a foetus a person, but I accept that a fully formed baby (still in the womb) could be considered to be a person.

[henry quirk]

I accept that a fully formed baby (still in the womb) could be considered to be a person.

Not seein' how this is a better or firmer position.

Let's be concrete: Mom is midway thru her ninth month. She carries a fully formed baby. She also lives in a state where late-term abortion is permitted. If she were to abort the fully formed baby: is it murder (the unjust killing of a person) or simply the excision of meat, the removal of a complex tumor?

[Harbal]

I accept that a fully formed baby (still in the womb) could be considered to be a person.

Not seein' how this is a better or firmer position.

I can't modify my opinion specifically to satisfy your need for decisiveness, henry.

Let's be concrete: Mom is midway thru her ninth month. She carries a fully formed baby. She also lives in a state where late-term abortion is permitted. If she were to abort the fully formed baby: is it murder (the unjust killing of a person) or simply the excision of meat, the removal of a complex tumor?

No, henry, I can't be concrete, because this isn't a black or white situation, and it actually worries me that people see it as one. I think unrestricted abortion should be available in the early stages of pregnancy, but not in the late stage. I don't know what the cut off point is in your country or mine, but I don't think abortion should be permitted in the ninth month. At exactly what stage of development abortion should be prohibited is an arbitrary decision, and certainly not one that I am qualified to have an opinion on.

I do think the abortion of a fully formed baby is wrong, but it would only be murder if the law prescribed it as such. I believe the term "murder" means unlawful homicide, not unjust homicide.

[henry quirk]

I do think the abortion of a fully formed baby is wrong

See? Bein' definite ain't hard.

Now, why is aborting a fully formed baby wrong?

[Harbal]

I do think the abortion of a fully formed baby is wrong

See? Bein' definite ain't hard.

I wasn't being less definite in the first place; I just didn't explain myself clearly enough.

Now, why is aborting a fully formed baby wrong?

Well, I don't see any difference between a fully formed baby pre-birth and one post birth. As for why I would consider putting a new born baby to death wrong, henry, that would take a whole lot of thinking about, and a whole lot longer to put into words. So, can it be sufficient to say that I would probably think it wrong for the same reasons that you would think it wrong.