Total Posts:4|Showing Posts:1-4
Jump to topic:

Interesting argument for abortions

000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2012 5:28:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
In an open letter to Rupert Murdock, after the whole "rape is God's gift" comment, Melissa Harris Perry Wrote this:

"You see, Mr. Mourdock, the violation of rape is more than physical. Rapists strip women of our right to choose, of our right to say no, of our right to control what is happening to our bodies. Most assailants tell us it is our fault. They tell us to be silent. Sometimes they even tell us it"s God"s will," she said. "That is the core violation of rape" it takes away choice. Richard, you believe it is fine to ignore a women"s right to choose because of your interpretation of divinity. Sound familiar?" (http://www.huffingtonpost.com... )

You can't say that rape is traumatic simply because it's a violation. If someone were to slap you or take your stuff, that would also be a violation, but not traumatic. The traumatic and heinous aspect of rape is the forced subjugation of the victim's being. Nature endows all people will sole private control over their corporal domain, and so to take that away is incredibly dehumanizing. Women have reason to support abortion on this very basis. You may raise the point that the fetus may have such objections as well, but that would simply be biologically false. Within a certain period of pregnancy if not the entirety of it the embryo cannot feel, cannot think, and is not conscious. So it doesn't feel violated. It doesn't experience pain. The only one experiencing these things is the mother.

My Point: The baby does not feel subjugated, only the mother does. So really this is not a battle of competing interests. This feeling of subjugation invokes the same offense as would rape.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2012 5:36:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/9/2012 5:28:10 PM, 000ike wrote:
In an open letter to Rupert Murdock, after the whole "rape is God's gift" comment, Melissa Harris Perry Wrote this:

"You see, Mr. Mourdock, the violation of rape is more than physical. Rapists strip women of our right to choose, of our right to say no, of our right to control what is happening to our bodies. Most assailants tell us it is our fault. They tell us to be silent. Sometimes they even tell us it"s God"s will," she said. "That is the core violation of rape" it takes away choice. Richard, you believe it is fine to ignore a women"s right to choose because of your interpretation of divinity. Sound familiar?" (http://www.huffingtonpost.com... )

You can't say that rape is traumatic simply because it's a violation. If someone were to slap you or take your stuff, that would also be a violation, but not traumatic. The traumatic and heinous aspect of rape is the forced subjugation of the victim's being. Nature endows all people will sole private control over their corporal domain, and so to take that away is incredibly dehumanizing. Women have reason to support abortion on this very basis. You may raise the point that the fetus may have such objections as well, but that would simply be biologically false. Within a certain period of pregnancy if not the entirety of it the embryo cannot feel, cannot think, and is not conscious. So it doesn't feel violated. It doesn't experience pain. The only one experiencing these things is the mother.

My Point: The baby does not feel subjugated, only the mother does. So really this is not a battle of competing interests. This feeling of subjugation invokes the same offense as would rape.

Are you kidding, mugging can be very traumatic for a person. It all depends on the subjectivity of the person.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2012 5:41:15 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/9/2012 5:36:28 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 11/9/2012 5:28:10 PM, 000ike wrote:
In an open letter to Rupert Murdock, after the whole "rape is God's gift" comment, Melissa Harris Perry Wrote this:

"You see, Mr. Mourdock, the violation of rape is more than physical. Rapists strip women of our right to choose, of our right to say no, of our right to control what is happening to our bodies. Most assailants tell us it is our fault. They tell us to be silent. Sometimes they even tell us it"s God"s will," she said. "That is the core violation of rape" it takes away choice. Richard, you believe it is fine to ignore a women"s right to choose because of your interpretation of divinity. Sound familiar?" (http://www.huffingtonpost.com... )

You can't say that rape is traumatic simply because it's a violation. If someone were to slap you or take your stuff, that would also be a violation, but not traumatic. The traumatic and heinous aspect of rape is the forced subjugation of the victim's being. Nature endows all people will sole private control over their corporal domain, and so to take that away is incredibly dehumanizing. Women have reason to support abortion on this very basis. You may raise the point that the fetus may have such objections as well, but that would simply be biologically false. Within a certain period of pregnancy if not the entirety of it the embryo cannot feel, cannot think, and is not conscious. So it doesn't feel violated. It doesn't experience pain. The only one experiencing these things is the mother.

My Point: The baby does not feel subjugated, only the mother does. So really this is not a battle of competing interests. This feeling of subjugation invokes the same offense as would rape.

Are you kidding, mugging can be very traumatic for a person. It all depends on the subjectivity of the person.

and not every rape victim is traumatized by rape....do you have a point or is that the extent of thought you put into that retort?

Just in case you missed it, the point here is that it's not a hard and fast rule, nor is it an intermittently subjective analysis. It's based on the average person and the majority of responses. Most people are not traumatized by mugging.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2012 5:42:33 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/9/2012 5:41:15 PM, 000ike wrote:

and not every rape victim is traumatized by rape....do you have a point or is that the extent of thought you put into that retort?

Just in case you missed it, the point here is that it's not a hard and fast rule, nor is it an intermittently subjective analysis. It's based on the average person and the majority of responses. Most people are not traumatized by mugging.

and for the people that are traumatized by mugging, it only feeds into my original point. That sense of powerlessness and subjugation.

So you haven't attack much of anything.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault