Women should not be allowed to have abortions as it is murder! I am a rape survivor and I became pregnant as a result of the rape. I kept the baby and she is my little baby girl, now aged 3 and I love her more than anything. Most women regret having abortions even when pregnant from rape. I would do the same again if I was raped and became pregnant again. The only time a woman should be considered for an abortion is if her life is at risk during pregnancy!
1.) How in any way is the rape the babys fault? The baby is completely innocent. How can you kill an innocent child? Not to mention they are your own child. Oh, and the innocent baby can feel the pain of being ripped apart during abortion.
2.) Abortion messes up the body and is proven to make women not able to have other children after the abortion.
3.) Adoption. You may not want to keep the rapists baby, which is fair. But there are hundreds of thousands of couples that are unable to have children and would dream of adopting them.
Step 1: Have rapist put in jail. Step 2: Give birth to baby. Step 3: Have a test proving he is the father. Step 4: If you don't want the baby, give it up for adoption. Also, abortions are dangerous and traumatizing. Plus, it's not the baby's fault. And anyone who says you are a bad person for getting raped is going to hell, and so is your rapist.
It is unfair to kill a child just because he or she is the product of a rape. If the victim feels the need to kill someone then the government should let her kill her rapist, the person who deserves to be punished, instead of letting her kill an innocent child.
"Point of perceptibility" here means when the unborn baby can perceive (anything, it may just be a dream but it's still something) and so properly turns from being an object into a person. At that point it's a person and murder is murder. Before that there is nothing of which to have rights to protect.
Rape is a tragic circumstance which breaks hope and gives turmoil to both young and old women. With my personal opinion, I feel that, owing to the scientific and demographical logic, abortion does not actually help a woman.
Dr. David Reardon, a reknowned pro-life activist recently published research based on the effects on post-abortion. His book, "Victims and Victors", used statistics from letters and survey responses from 192 women who became pregnant as a result of rape or incest. 164 were victims of rape and 28 were victims of incest (sexual assault involving a family member). Overall, 69 percent continued the pregnancy and either raised the child or made an adoption plan, 29 percent had abortions and 1.5 percent had miscarriages. According to Mr. Reardon, 80% of rape victims had reported that abortion was the wrong solution, and, relating to birth, none of the women who gave birth to a child conceived in sexual assault expressed regret or wished they had aborted instead.
I feel it is an issue but ULTIMATELY lopsided by the facts. Of course, there have been proven to be rape babies ignored and abused by parents through birth, which is potentially damaging for both the child and the mother. However, adoption is the best choice right now. Of course, relating to underage pregnancy, it is nearly impossible for young children from the age 11 and under to deliver.
I sincerely believe and have no choice to admit abortion as a choice, as it, fascinating as the knowledge is, will not help four in five women. Adoption is the best thing you can do for your child and is a merit of true virtue among women who make this brave decision. Please be careful when you read this and take time to consider.
While I can understand the physical and emotional trauma of being raped, it is wrong to assume that the child conceived by this is disposable. It is cruel to assume that a child conceived by this is a 'rapists baby' , the term implies that the child is just a miniature version of the rapist and that his (or her) conception defines him, that he wouldn't have been born with a clean slate like 'wanted' babies. I think Mother Teresa, a woman renowned for her humanity, says it best. "Our girls were misused, they were forced, they didn't want sin, but what you are going to make them do, or help them do, is to commit murder, and this will be with them for life. They will never forget that they as mothers have killed their children." Just as a disclaimer, the sinners Mother Teresa referred to was the rapists, not the victims. Even if raising the child is too emotionally hard, giving the baby up for adoption will ensure it is given a chance like everyone reading this was. Basically, nine months of the mothers life is well worth eighty years of her child's life.
Rape is a horrible and traumatic event in the life of any woman who has suffered its indignity. Not only must she bear the memory of the rape, but she also carries the child of the rapist. The question, then, is whether or not a woman should abort the baby that is the result of a rape? This is a very difficult question to answer. In my opinion, a baby that is a product of rape should not be killed. It is not the fault of the baby that it has been brought into the world. Why should the life of the baby be sacrificed because of the indignity suffered against the woman? Yes, I know rape is horrible and that it is wrong. I know the woman has the right of self-protection and emotional security.
I know some will strongly object and say that my attitude is callous and insensitive to the needs of the woman. Indeed, a woman impregnated through rape has suffered greatly, and bearing the child would certainly be a reminder of the horrible incident. Without a doubt, the woman gets the raw end of the deal.
It is only natural, then, for a woman to want to protect herself physically, emotionally, and financially by removing from her very body that which has invaded her through rape. I cannot blame a woman for desiring to justify an abortion intellectually and emotionally in this case. But still, in spite of the great indignity against the woman, and in spite of the emotional and financial hardships she would bear in the future, must the child be required to pay for the sin of the rapist? Is it right to kill the child who is not at fault? Is it right to take the life of someone who has done nothing wrong? In civilized nations, protection of the innocent is a primary concern. In the hearts of mothers, love should win out. Love that sacrifices and gives life, instead of taking it, should be the goal.
It's a child lmao. If some random person came to your door and left a baby would you kill it? Nope. You dont have to keep the baby you can put it up for adoption. I guess people these days don't realize the value of a child with all the potential in the world and see it more as a parasite waiting to feed on you money.
Being raped is very traumatic especially if you have to carry a reminder with you. Even if the baby is adopted the woman would still have to carry it for nine mounts and go through labor. Labor is the absolute worst pain a woman can experience and after the pain of rape it would add to the trauma. I am well aware that after labor you forget most of it but the nine months and bits and pieces of labor would still be in your memory. Forcing an already victimized person to go through this is absolute torture in my opinion. Before the fetus develops a nervous system and the ability to perceive pain let alone rejection there doesn't seem to be much of an argument to me. I am also aware that some rape victims deliver their children voluntarily and if it helps them feel better delivering and raising them they should. I simply don't believe we should force women to carry an unwanted child.
I don't need one. No woman should have to birth a rapist, there are too many as it is. Imagine being raped for NINE MONTHS from the INSIDE. That's all the argument I need. No one should be allowed to force a rape victim to carry a mini-rapist that is NOT part of her body, it is a separate entity that only drags society down.
Unwanted pregnancy already brings a burden that many people can not afford, adding now that the product is a result from a rape, the caring of the child might be compromised. The emotional cost has no price and the monetary cost places an extra burden to the mother in a world that already discriminates benefits toward her. Her believes and fear of the Creator may save the child's life, but her soul is doomed anyway. She needs to have too much love in her heart to loves that child.
First, this is a very horrible thing to do to a rape victim. It could even involve someone too young to carry a child to term.
Secondly, don't assume just because feel that a zygote is a "baby" or "life" that we all must ascribe to your beliefs. If something can't survive without being attached to a host to be alive, then in a sense it is parasitic in nature not an independent life of its own. Point is, we all have the right to make up our own mind on this, and act accordingly.
Thirdly, how about being more concerned with the children that are ALREADY here? Every 10 seconds a child dies from starvation in the world (fact!) but you want to fight to keep raped women from abortions.
There is nothing in the Bible which says that rape victims should be forced to have the baby of a rapist. The Bible does not support this backward attitude. If you read the Bible then you will note that there is nothing in the Bible which says that a raped woman should be forced to have the baby of a rapist.
She has already been through enough. Why should she be forced to carry that monster's baby? If God did not want her to have an abortion then he should have stopped the rapist. Also terminating an embryo is not terminating a human being. It is basically terminating an amoeba that is in the process of becoming a human being. Just like milk that is being churned is not butter, an embryo is not a human being. The milk is in the process of becoming butter but it absolutely is not butter. If I knock the churning barrel over, did I spill milk or butter. I spilled milk. It is like saying that a log that is on fire is a pile of ashes. It is not a pile of ashes. The wood is in the process of becoming a pile of ashes, but at that point it is most certainly not a pile of ashes. It is not a pile of ashes until the process is finished. The rapist took her free will away one time. The pro lifers are trying to take it away again to protect something that is nothing more than an amoeba. It is bad enough that she was raped, why should she be forced to carry that monster's baby. It will be a constant reminder of the trauma she experienced. In cases of rape ,incest, and the pregnancy being a danger to the mother's health, an abortion should be an option. If you don't like abortion DONT GET ONE. But don't make that decision for me. You are not the one that was raped, you are not the one that has to carry that sicko's child, so the decision is not up to you. You pro lifers care more about potential life more than you care about life that is already established. Of course they will tell you that "the baby didn't ask to be there", well the woman did not ask to be raped and impregnated by that monstrous sicko so she not be forced to give birth to his baby. An embryo is not a human being, it is only in the process of becoming one, the same thing for a fetus. It is not a human being, it is only in the process of becoming a human being. So an abortion in early term is not killing a human being, it is only terminating the process of it becoming a human being.
I have been researching the topic of pregnancy in rape victims, and I have come across a number of articles. One speaks about how the woman have the choice their own and should not be rejected by their choice or forced into making a different choice. Another one spoke about how the woman are angry at the political news trying to making abortion illegal, even for the rape victims. In the first article, it mentioned that giving birth to the child actually helped them come to terms with the rape, while in the article is made the other case, that it traumatized the women even more. But either way. I think it is the woman's choice whether or not she wants to keep the baby. Nobody should force her into anything. It's supposed to be a free country, so why isn't it?
They should not be forced because it's just wrong. A person should have the right to choose whether or not they want to have a baby from rape or incest. I understand it's not the baby's fault. However, it's not the woman's fault either. She should not have to suffer for a child she got through rape or incest.
If the baby is carried to term for evidence in court then what will happen to that evidence when all is decided by the court? Is the mother forced to take care of the evidence? And what about the future of the evidence (child)? If the female is raped and she is 12 years old or below is she held accountable for her actions of carrying the baby to term? What happens to her civil and humanitarian rights as a person and a victim?
To force a victim to be further victimized is ludicrous. A woman who is forcibly raped should not be forced again to do something against her will. Abortion is legal in the United States, and so there really is no debate or argument to be made here. Whether or not the fetus has the right to life is another argument, but should a victim continue to be victimized after the crime? This simply does not make any sense whatsoever.
Rape along with if the child is a threat to the mother, is one of those special cases where an abortion should be allowed if the mom decides she wants that. She did not consent to having sex with the father, let alone becoming pregnant by him, so why should she be forced to bear the burden of that? It is not right, it would make an already traumatic experience even worse for her. She should be allowed to choose what she wants to do, no question about it.