quote:Originally posted by steven: I really would like a response on the rape issue.
I'd like a response on that from ANY pro-lifer.
What response? It's been addressed multiple times here before, both by people who believe abortion should be allowed in cases of rape and those who believe it should not be allowed in cases of rape.
If you mean a response to your allegation that banning abortion will increase rape, I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you. Belle already addressed the underlying assumption of that post.
I might be willing to go more into depth about it if I had any hope that you were actually interested in discussing the issue. But when you both bring up murder as a tactic of the pro-life movement in the context of this thread as well as postulating some link between believing that abortion should be prohibited and thinking rape is OK because women shouldn't control their own bodies, I'm highly skeptical of both your motives and your willingness to address people respectfully.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: I don't see why there should be a linear relationship between number of victims and research dollars spent. We certainly take other factors into account, including emotional impact on those who know the victim and suffering incurred prior to death. There's also an element of "fashion" to what diseases are given the most research funding.
Indeed. I draw a distinction here between what is and what should be. Just because it is -- I think -- doesn't mean it shouldn't be changed.
And as I said above, I am indeed concerned just as much as with what should be as what is, because both determine what will be.
quote:We try to stop some deaths. No one here has denied that.
Understood. It was a point of clarification about the applicability of terminology that had been used earlier. It appears all here agree about the use of that terminology, which is lovely from my perspective.
quote:I was not intending to paraphrase you.
Excellent! Then I have no quibble.
quote:After thinking about it, I came to a different conclusion: that "worry" is not a proper measure of worth of the being worried about or the effect of the deaths of such beings.
I don't take my worry (or lack thereof) as a direct indication of the worth of something. I do, however, take it as an indication of my own underlying beliefs, which is what I was examining.
quote:Moreover, I don't see an examination of the effect of a being's death on others - whether that effect is motivating the spending of resources to avoid it or the mourning of it afterwards - as a valid indicator of the measure of a death or a factor in determining "equivalence" of deaths. Much more important are the means of a death - including intent - and reasons for it.
I don't understand what you mean by "a valid indicator of the measure of a death." When I speak of "'equivalence' of death," again, I am speaking particularly of how it reflects individual beliefs and values. The mode or intent of someone else's action is not how I come to know my beliefs about it -- it is my reaction that tells me about myself. Of course, my reaction is based on the facts of the case, but those facts are not equivalent to my judgments.
quote:We had a decent discussion about the principles underlying that once, although half of it is missing now.
So much is lost, eh? It is a shame.
quote:In short, I don't see inconsistencies here, so I probably can't address your interest.
I can see you do not. I think this is because there is some muddled conflation of ideas and/or terms midway.
Whether or not further discussion about that would yield more understanding is another question. I surely wouldn't want to sacrifice the harmony of friendship here over this, so I am happy to leave that call up to you.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:CT, I'm sorry because it does look like a trap. I mean, if I say yes, put public resources into the research to save the unborn I'll be countered with "So you'd let a five year old die of a disease that could be cured if only research had been one on his disease instead of research into miscarriages." Sorry, not going to play that game.
I'm not sure I understand the concern about putting someone into a "trap" or in being led into one. If one's position, taken to a logical conclusion, leads to an unpleasant place, shouldn't we discuss that place and why we find it unpleasant?
If you actually feel that pre-birth and post-birth children have equivalent value, then I don't see anything abhorent about a position that advocates a redistribution of resources to equalize the efforts to protect both groups.
What would be more interesting to me is if you claim there is equivalent value but despite that you would not advocate a redistribution of resources. I would be interested in how you reconcile such a position.
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:When I speak of "'equivalence' of death," again, I am speaking particularly of how it reflects individual beliefs and values.
I have no idea what this means. How does a death "reflect individual beliefs and values"?
quote:The mode or intent of someone else's action is not how I come to know my beliefs about it -- it is my reaction that tells me about myself. Of course, my reaction is based on the facts of the case, but those facts are not equivalent to my judgments.
When I said "others" I was referring to "other than the person who died." In this sense, I was referring to the fact that your analysis is of the effect of a death on another being - specifically inducing specific reactions in you (the other being, in this case) as a means of determining how that other being (again, you) really feels/thinks about that death.
I fully expect human reactions to events, including my own, to be inconsistent with the moral implications of those events. Therefore, I don't find such inconsistency to be particularly probative. And when I directly examine this issue, for reasons both Belle and I have gone into at some length, I don't find there to be any inconsistency between the idea that unborn children are fully as human and deserving of legal protection as born children and the generally lesser reactions I have to miscarriages of people I don't know compared to my reactions to deaths of people I don't know.
In examining the difference between my emotional reactions concerning different deaths, I find that they are influenced by how well I can empathize with the deceased and their loved ones. If someone I know dies, there is a direct impact on me. I can visualize the world with and without that person and feel the loss directly. If someone who is close to someone I knows, the direct visible impact on that person has an impact on me. When a death involves prolonged suffering, I can imagine the suffering visited upon me or my loved ones.
It's hard to empathize with another's unborn child. The world isn't different so much as an imagined, hoped-for world to be is different. To the parents who had already entered that world, the loss is much more immediate.
quote:I can see you do not. I think this is because there is some muddled conflation of ideas and/or terms midway.
I'm not sure where the muddled conflation of ideas or terms is occurring.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: I'm not sure where the muddled conflation of ideas or terms is occurring.
But do you think it is worth pursuing in discussion, or would you prefer not to continue? (Or some other option? )
Honest question -- I'm trying explicitly not to push in an irritating way. I am happy to let things stand as they are, should others find that best for any reason (explicit or not).
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Got nothing to say about the issue, right now, but maybe the thread title could be changed again. Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by steven: One difficulty with making abortion illegal is finding a way to teach boys and young men how to treat women appropriately despite the fact that laws say that women have no right to control what happens to their bodies. If you support abortion in the case of rape or incest, with all the proof of rape needed being the woman's claim to her doctor, then I might agree with you. Might.
posted
I don't see where he said rape would increase. I can see that being one logical conclusion of his argument, but there is no indication that it's the conclusion that steven has reached.
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was posting where I got it from. If that's not what he meant, fine, but his alternative interpretation isn't any better.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dag, I'm not the Devil. at most, I'm the spawn of the Devil. No more. So stop acting like I'm the Devil!
Seriously, I worry about your blood pressure.
No, you can call me a liar if you want, but...I just don't think about rape as something that happens unless someone brings it up. I've never been raped, and I've never had the slightest inclination to rape anyone. Talking to me about rape is like talking to a dog about giant squids.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dag, seriously, you're going to die young if you don't ease up. This is not the way to approach the issue.
I brought up rape for a separate reason, and did not connect the two in my mind at all.
Where are you getting that I meant rape? Are you having some kind of spiritual epiphany that I meant that? I seriously am wondering why you think I'm lying.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Look, I've already accepted your clarification.
But when you say "talking to me about rape is like talking to a dog about giant squids" in a thread in which you've talked about rape, my confusion is understandable.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
Rape is always brought up in any abortion discussion. Creating conditions where women are generally ignored/devalued is not as much.
I doubt women get raped that much more often in extremist Islamic societies than in the US. I don't know what the rates are, and I doubt there are good statistics out there on it, but I figure that the harsh control that fathers and husbands put on women keep them away from non-family adult men more, thus reducing the odds of rape, althought this is total speculation on my part.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Random-stranger rape, probably, yes. Being married off to men at least halfway against their will, well, there's a different kettle of cultural assumptions.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kwea: I agree with CT, at least as far as my intent in discussing these issues yet again. I usually avoid abortion thread like the plague these days, because I have already firmed up my own thoughts and stance on it.
Also, these discussions tend to bring out the worst in people because it is such a sensitive isuue, and I don't like how most people treat each other in them.
For the most part, this thread has been fairly civil, and I really hope it stays that way. Not because I think we will find a "soloution", but because one fo the only ways to explore these issues is in frank conversation with other people who care , even if they are on the other side of the idealogical fence. Maybe even because they are on the other side of the issues.
I gotta say...I just watched Obama's discussion about faith and politics, and it reminded me about this thread, and a few other conversation I have had with a few people here at Hatrack. Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
That was a pretty amazing speech. I really hope that he can raise the level of public discourse on abortion as well as many other contentious issues.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: It's hard to empathize with another's unborn child. The world isn't different so much as an imagined, hoped-for world to be is different. To the parents who had already entered that world, the loss is much more immediate.
See, I don't have a problem with this.... because I don't see it as an imagined difference at all. I see it no different than if they lost a 2 month old, and I feel greatly for them.
Any more than an abortion would be an imaginary loss.
In the case of a miscarriage, most of the time the parents really WANTED a child, so losing it is far worse, IMO. They probably have already begun changing their lives, and it all comes crashing to a halt.
I understand about a cognitive dissonance within a personal belief system. I feel one every time I enter a discussion about this issue, because I defend the right of a woman to terminate her pregnancy while not approving of abortion in my own personal life.
I have said it before, but it bears repeating.....I had a frank and candid talk with my wife before we slept together, just to make sure we were on the same page. I would never, excepting for the health of the woman, be part of an abortion. While I could not force a woman to have the child, an abortion would end whatever we had together because of my personal views and beliefs.
She agreed with me, thank God.
But that doesn't mean I am willing to remove that right to choose from people who don't come from the same religious background and upbringing as mine. It concerns too much of the womans own health and welfare for my opinion to outweigh hers in the end result.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
CT, yes I had a final on Sunday - when I have to be home with my kids during the day I'm limited to taking classes on nights and weekends. Fortunately I'll be back to day classes (with the exception of Wednesday night - which bums me because I teach choir on Wednesday night and now have to find someone to take my place for the fall semester). At any rate, it was only the first of my finals so my next two weeks will be pretty frazzled. No time for another abortion debate so I won't be answering any more questions here. The good news is, there will always be another thread like this coming around sometime. Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I really would like a response on the rape issue.
I'd like a response on that from ANY pro-lifer.
Posting in the abortion thread as my first Hatrack post seems like a bad idea, but...
I'm pro-life. I am fine with abortions for medical reasons, when necessary (although I'm appreciative my mom risked her life to have me); and I consider abortions for cases of rape and incest as a medical issue, as long as a doctor also signs off on it. Carrying a child to term after rape could be quite psychologically damaging for certain women, which is why I consider it a medical issue.
That said I'd rather those pregnancies were prevented in the first place by the availability of the morning-after pill, both as part of a rape kit and also just available by prescription for those women who aren't going to go to a hospital afterwards.
quote:Rape is always brought up in any abortion discussion. Creating conditions where women are generally ignored/devalued is not as much.
That's very much a matter of perspective. You consider a women "not having control over her body" because she can't have an abortion as women being ignored/devalued. I consider abortion a symptom of a society where both women and children are ignored and devalued. Why is it necessary for women to have abortions in the first place? Do any of those reasons indicate that women are empowered?
Abortion is legal in China - but I don't think anyone would argue that the widespread abortion of female children indicates much respect for women.
Posts: 57 | Registered: Jul 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow, gone for two days, and now I can't really pick out a recent post to debate that hasn't already been debated. So if anyone wants me to discuss a previous issue in the thread or answer a question (old or new), please feel free. I've got nothing to do at the moment.
Posts: 1594 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Carrying a child to term after rape could be quite psychologically damaging for certain women, which is why I consider it a medical issue.
Carrying a child to term and then putting it up for adoption could also be psychologically damaging.
Carrying a child to term and keeping it when that child wasn't desired in the first place could be psychologically damaging.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Carrying a child to term after rape could be quite psychologically damaging for certain women, which is why I consider it a medical issue. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carrying a child to term and then putting it up for adoption could also be psychologically damaging.
Carrying a child to term and keeping it when that child wasn't desired in the first place could be psychologically damaging.
And having an abortion can also be psychologically damaging. We can't protect an individual from all possible consequences of their actions.
However, the woman who was raped has ALREADY been psychologically damaged, unlike the women who had consensual sex, and carrying the child to term - the child of her rapist - may potentially worsen that damage. we're talking about "psychological damage" on a far more drastic level here then anything which may arise from consensual sex, which I think is clear.
Posts: 57 | Registered: Jul 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
How and where do you make the distinction between what psychological damage is great enough to be considered a medical issue, and thus justifying an abortion, and what doesn't?
If the reason for being against abortion is that it's the killing of a child, I don't see how any amount of potential psychological damage justifies abortion.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:If the reason for being against abortion is that it's the killing of a child, I don't see how any amount of potential psychological damage justifies abortion.
Yes, it's the killing of a child, but IMO when there's a health risk to the mother, abortion is acceptable. If a woman is traumatized by a rape and further traumatized by carrying the child, then I can see that as a possible health risk due to the deep psychological effects of the entire situation. If you don't see where that's different, then I really don't think I can convince you.
Posts: 57 | Registered: Jul 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Can you think of any other situations where you think it's OK to kill an innocent person in order to avoid psychological trauma inflicted by a third party?
quote:If you don't see where that's different, then I really don't think I can convince you.
I have no idea what you are saying. If I can't see where it is different from what?
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If you don't see where that's different, then I really don't think I can convince you. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have no idea what you are saying. If I can't see where it is different from what?
If you don't see the difference between the trauma of childbearing/childbirth for a woman who has been raped, and for a woman who hasn't.
quote:Can you think of any other situations where you think it's OK to kill an innocent person in order to avoid psychological trauma inflicted by a third party?
Are you against abortions when necessary to save the life of the mother? If so, then from your perspective this is a valid argument. If not... I think extreme psychological anguish also constitutes a health risk to the mother.
There are women who are raped and still choose to carry the child to term. I think that's an incredibly brave and selfless thing to do. But I don't think any woman should be forced to carry the child if it's going to have an extreme negative effect. I wouldn't want to see a woman commit suicide because it was so painful for her to carry this unwelcome, alien life. And psychological issues ARE health issues - if it's going to impede her recovery to carry the child, then with a psychiatrist's counsel she should be able to terminate the pregnancy so the effects from the rape are not compounded.
Posts: 57 | Registered: Jul 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:If you don't see the difference between the trauma of childbearing/childbirth for a woman who has been raped, and for a woman who hasn't.
Saying that I'm not sure that the differences between the two justifies taking the life of an innocent is not the same thing as saying that I cannot see any differences between the two.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
)![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
