# Non women-hating reasons for incest/rape exception to abortion rules? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 29, 2012, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-women-hating-reasons-for-incest-rape-exception-to-abortion-rules/632983 "2012-08-29T00:32:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 1:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-women-hating-reasons-for-incest-rape-exception-to-abortion-rules/632983/81 "2012-08-31T13:08:33Z")
> [@Iggy](#): > > Depends. > > The pregnancy may be very much wanted in the sense that the pregnant woman very much wants to have that particular child. And still that same pregnancy may become unwanted for various medical reasons. It is a horrid decision. > > A single friend went through IVF and managed to conceive. She was elated. Further along the doctor advised her to abort due to complications which would likely result in the death of both my friend and her baby. Cruel decision to have to make. Fair point. I was talking strictly about abortions for unwanted pregnancies. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 1:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-women-hating-reasons-for-incest-rape-exception-to-abortion-rules/632983/82 "2012-08-31T13:10:49Z")
> [@Carmady](#): > > No, it really isn’t. Many do consider abortion murder, yes. But they do not want to give a fetus the “same protection” as a person. They want to give it the right not to be aborted, a right that makes no sense for a person, and which conflicts with the closest parallel situations for a person. Fine - they want to consider it murder, just like it would be murder to kill a person. > [@](#): > > Never, at any point, did they believe a fetus should have the same rights as a person. > > It was never their goal to give a fetus the rights of a person, so arguments along those lines are meaningless to them. Neither of us are anti-abortion, so we can’t speak for them. But I simply think my understanding of their views is more accurate than yours. Not much more to say unless we want to go do a bunch of research. > [@](#): > > Exactly. And how do you know if it was a natural miscarriage or an abortion=murder? Why are you asking me that? I’m not anti-abortion. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-women-hating-reasons-for-incest-rape-exception-to-abortion-rules/632983/83 "2012-08-31T13:17:08Z")
> [@Chessic\_Sense](#): > > Says you. Says me, sometimes murder is OK, like on the battlefield or in death row. Or when no one consented to helping the victim live. > > Again, says you. Says me, a fetus and a child are different. Killing a child is always wrong. Killing a fetus is sometimes wrong, depending on whether the child was conceived consentually. Wow. That’s fucking pathetic. So you think it’s okay to kill a fetus just because of how it was created? Unbelievable. What incredibly fucked up ethics you have. Of course, a fetus created unintentionally, through consensual sex, might also be said to be non-consensual, since the woman didn’t “give pemission” for it to be conceived. But no matter. For you to walk in here and declare that you want to tell women they can’t abort based on nothing but their decision-making on sex was is absurd and insulting. To say that the government should intervene in a woman’s body for the interest of a fetus - and then turn around and abandon certain innocent fetuses simply based on who gave permission for them to be created - is loony hypocrisy. You are the last person who needs to be telling any woman what to do. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 1:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-women-hating-reasons-for-incest-rape-exception-to-abortion-rules/632983/84 "2012-08-31T13:18:50Z")
> [@Chessic\_Sense](#): > > “Pro-choice”, taken to its logical conclusion, turns people into monsters that kill babies. Plain and simple. You’re a monster who kills babies too, dude–any “baby” who is the product of rape. I suggest you find the courage to be consistent in your beliefs before you spout off any more. Either you protect ALL fetuses, or stay out of it. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 1:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-women-hating-reasons-for-incest-rape-exception-to-abortion-rules/632983/85 "2012-08-31T13:21:30Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Except…one tries to regulate other people’s behaviors, and the other doesn’t. One intrudes on individual freedom, and the other allows people to choose for themselves. No, one side says that an individual freedom exists, and the other says it doesn’t. The government regulates behavior when it bans murder. There is no individual freedom to murder. If abortion is akin to murder, that’s the same thing. If abortion is not like murder, it’s a matter of a woman’s privacy. That’s why the ONLY question that matters in this debate is the status of the zygote/embryo/fetus. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 1:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-women-hating-reasons-for-incest-rape-exception-to-abortion-rules/632983/86 "2012-08-31T13:24:23Z")
> [@Chessic\_Sense](#): > > Second, an orphaned child is not the same as a fetus. Exactly. So you’re pro-choice? You can NEVER talk yourself into a situation where you can say abortion is unethical, yet then say it’s ethical in case of rape. It simply doesn’t work. You have to take one or the other. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-women-hating-reasons-for-incest-rape-exception-to-abortion-rules/632983/87 "2012-08-31T13:25:36Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Yes, and your “eternal vigilance” will fail if you don’t get your argument right. And getting your argument right means knowing their argument. My argument’s just fine. The failing would be in being overly generous to arguments that are not reasoned just because they are in opposition to arguments that are. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 1:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-women-hating-reasons-for-incest-rape-exception-to-abortion-rules/632983/88 "2012-08-31T13:37:30Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > My argument’s just fine. The failing would be in being overly generous to arguments that are not reasoned just because they are in opposition to arguments that are. If you think you can declare victory before the debate begins, you’re going to fail miserably. I don’t think you’ve met your match yet. Someone will come along and knock you down a peg someday. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-women-hating-reasons-for-incest-rape-exception-to-abortion-rules/632983/89 "2012-08-31T14:43:00Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > If you think you can declare victory before the debate begins, you’re going to fail miserably. That’s a rather bold misinterpretation of my statements. My reference to “eternal vigilance” should clearly indicate I don’t consider the issue resolved. It is _effectively_ resolved in Canada, for now at least, but I have justifiable concerns that backsliding can occur, sparked by pro-lifers using their standard emotional appeals, aided by people who think that since there are two opposing sides, they must be of equal merit. > [@](#): > > I don’t think you’ve met your match yet. Someone will come along and knock you down a peg someday. Well, here I am. If you know of a possible candidate, feel free to pass along my invitation to bring it on. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-women-hating-reasons-for-incest-rape-exception-to-abortion-rules/632983/90 "2012-08-31T14:50:03Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > That’s a rather bold misinterpretation of my statements. My reference to “eternal vigilance” should clearly indicate I don’t consider the issue resolved. No, but you think you can just walk in and declare that the other side is irrational and call it a day. Won’t work. The first thing they’ll say is “that’s not what I believe at all. You don’t even understand what I believe, so how can you argue against it?” Then what will you do? > [@](#): > > aided by people who think that since there are two opposing sides, they must be of equal merit. Nobody said that. (Oh, and there’s plenty of lazy emotional appeals from pro-choicers too.) Well, here I am. If you know of a possible candidate, feel free to pass along my invitation to bring it on. [/QUOTE] No way. I want someone better than you in the ring. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-women-hating-reasons-for-incest-rape-exception-to-abortion-rules/632983/91 "2012-08-31T15:03:51Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > No, but you think you can just walk in and declare that the other side is irrational and call it a day. Won’t work. Well, I have to do again tomorrow and the day after that. That’s eternal vigilance for you. > [@](#): > > The first thing they’ll say is “that’s not what I believe at all. You don’t even understand what I believe, so how can you argue against it?” Then what will you do? Ask them to state their beliefs, with the full expectation it’ll be another form of “don’t kill babies / mothers don’t matter”. I admit the possibility I may one day be surprised. I’ve even described on this board the (highly hypothetical) circumstances under which my own stance might change. > [@](#): > > Nobody said that. Ever? > [@](#): > > (Oh, and there’s plenty of lazy emotional appeals from pro-choicers too.) Well, if they’re on the rational side for a less-than-rational reason, no big deal. > [@](#): > > No way. I want someone better than you in the ring. So you’re waiting for someone who’s met their match even _less?_ ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-women-hating-reasons-for-incest-rape-exception-to-abortion-rules/632983/92 "2012-08-31T15:35:32Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Well, I have to do again tomorrow and the day after that. That’s eternal vigilance for you. No, that’s laziness. You’ll get your ass handed to you some day, and you’ll learn. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-women-hating-reasons-for-incest-rape-exception-to-abortion-rules/632983/93 "2012-08-31T15:47:48Z")
You’re making less and less sense, so I guess we’re done. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-women-hating-reasons-for-incest-rape-exception-to-abortion-rules/632983/94 "2012-08-31T16:03:44Z")
Since I think the incest exception is under the assumption that it is rape, I’m not going to cover that. I can’t wrap my head around it otherwise. Well, the reason they want to do it is what most people think–they consider having a baby a natural consequence of having sex, and, thus, if the baby was had through no input of their own, the baby wasn’t their fault and they can remove it. The only question is why that is assumed to mean that women are hated. What is hated is premarital sex. It’s just that the consequences are more visible to women. This also means that pro-lifers do not actually value the unborn as equal to humans, as the pain caused to the rape victim in having to raise the child is considered of more importance than the life of the unborn. It’s just that the pain of going through childbirth on its own is not considered more important. They value the unborn more than the pro-abortion\* crowd. \*Used to exclude pro-choicers who are anti-abortion, but don’t think they have the right to tell others how to believe, not as a slight towards the group. Remember, I’m in neither group. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-women-hating-reasons-for-incest-rape-exception-to-abortion-rules/632983/95 "2012-08-31T16:14:54Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > You’re making less and less sense, so I guess we’re done. You’ll learn. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-women-hating-reasons-for-incest-rape-exception-to-abortion-rules/632983/96 "2012-08-31T16:24:16Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > The only question is why that is assumed to mean that women are hated. What is hated is premarital sex. It’s just that the consequences are more visible to women. Well, even if “hate” is too strong a term, there’s a determined indifference that can be enable harm all the same, rather like being okay with the Cherokee being driven out of the southeast doesn’t require _hatred_ of the Cherokee, but an utter lack of concern about what’ll happen to them as a result. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-women-hating-reasons-for-incest-rape-exception-to-abortion-rules/632983/97 "2012-08-31T18:26:48Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Well, even if “hate” is too strong a term, there’s a determined indifference that can be enable harm all the same, rather like being okay with the Cherokee being driven out of the southeast doesn’t require _hatred_ of the Cherokee, but an utter lack of concern about what’ll happen to them as a result. You’re starting to learn. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-women-hating-reasons-for-incest-rape-exception-to-abortion-rules/632983/98 "2012-08-31T18:32:12Z")
> [@Chessic\_Sense](#): > > Second, an orphaned child is not the same as a fetus. First of all, one is aware of its own existence. Exactly. That’s the pro-choice position. A child is not the same as a fetus. > [@](#): > > But the more important factor is that a mother can essentially say to the fetus “I do not agree to support you,” and yet so can anyone in society say that to the orphan. No one in society is obligated to support that child, and if he dies, he dies. We don’t actually make that decision, but we could, and we used to. I don’t see how this supports your position that a child is not the same as a fetus. > [@](#): > > “Pro-choice”, taken to its logical conclusion, turns people into monsters that kill babies. Plain and simple. _But you just said that a child is not the same as a fetus!_ It seems like you want to have it both ways. You claim that a fetus is a baby when you argue against abortion. But when someone points out the full consequences as treating fetuses as children, you claim that they’re not. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-women-hating-reasons-for-incest-rape-exception-to-abortion-rules/632983/99 "2012-08-31T18:47:05Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > You’re starting to learn. This suggests you think my position has changed. You would be wrong. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2012, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-women-hating-reasons-for-incest-rape-exception-to-abortion-rules/632983/100 "2012-08-31T19:10:25Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > This suggests you think my position has changed. You would be wrong. No, your attitude has. It was never about your position. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-women-hating-reasons-for-incest-rape-exception-to-abortion-rules/632983.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/non-women-hating-reasons-for-incest-rape-exception-to-abortion-rules/632983.md?page=6)