Pro Choice
One of the reasons some women are pro choice is that a raped woman that becomes pregnant should not be required to take the fetus to birth. she should have control of her own body. Under this circumstance women should be allowed to abort.
Dr Mike Adams professor at the University of North Carolina - Wilmington has a suggestion about a pregnancy as a result of rape. Since pro-choice people say the woman should be able to abort such a fetus, he proposes: Since the fetus is an innocent person resulting from the rape, why not take it out on the guilty party. When there are two innocent persons in the crime of rape, why should one of the innocent persons lose their life? If a life is to be taken it is only just that the guilty party be the one to suffer the loss of life.
He proposes that the law should be changed so that the person that commits a rape, that results in a pregnancy, that person would be executed. Since it would be a law, the decision to kill is taken out of the hands of a woman who is herself an innocent victim. Also, should she feel compassion for the father of her child and say he should go free, it would be out of her hands, the law takes over. A jury trial would decide if there were any extenuating circumstances. Finding a forceful, un-enticed, masculine over-powerment would result in a guilty verdict and execution.
I find this an interesting idea, punish the guilty. Perhaps it would be a deterrent to future rapists. It would certainly cut down on the repeating rapist, or the recidivist rapist that does a rape after leaving prison.
What do you think?
Dr Mike Adams professor at the University of North Carolina - Wilmington has a suggestion about a pregnancy as a result of rape. Since pro-choice people say the woman should be able to abort such a fetus, he proposes: Since the fetus is an innocent person resulting from the rape, why not take it out on the guilty party. When there are two innocent persons in the crime of rape, why should one of the innocent persons lose their life? If a life is to be taken it is only just that the guilty party be the one to suffer the loss of life.
He proposes that the law should be changed so that the person that commits a rape, that results in a pregnancy, that person would be executed. Since it would be a law, the decision to kill is taken out of the hands of a woman who is herself an innocent victim. Also, should she feel compassion for the father of her child and say he should go free, it would be out of her hands, the law takes over. A jury trial would decide if there were any extenuating circumstances. Finding a forceful, un-enticed, masculine over-powerment would result in a guilty verdict and execution.
I find this an interesting idea, punish the guilty. Perhaps it would be a deterrent to future rapists. It would certainly cut down on the repeating rapist, or the recidivist rapist that does a rape after leaving prison.
What do you think?
posted by Marcel at
4:16 PM
14 Comments:
I am pro-choice for all aspects of life,not just a woman's right to control her own body. So the issue of aborting a product of rape is not high on my list. A woman is entitled to the right to choose regardless of how the pregnancy occurred.
I am also for the death penalty,and I have no issue with the death penalty for rape.
I find it very interesting that someone can claim to be pro-life and pro-death penalty, to me pro-choice extends to all choices. When will the right ever be honest and call it anti-abortion and anti-life after birth.
By
Gretchen, at 6:53 PM
The issue of executing the "guilty" still does not take care of the issue of the "unwanted" pregnancy. Why should the victim be forced to raise a child she did not want and will probably resent for the rest of that child's life. And if she is not prepared for such child are those that are Anti-choice prepared for her and her unwanted scorned child to be on public assistance for all of their needs including the therapy that will be needed by all when the child learns of their conception and that the mother never wanted them and was forced to keep them anyways? Sorry for the run-on sentence.
By
Adrienne, at 7:35 PM
I think Dr. mike Adams now holds the record for the most convoluted nonsequiter in the history of right wing thinking. He claines to have solved one problem with the solution to another unrelated (and it is unrelated) problem.
Secondly, you can be for or against the death penalty, but it has never reduced crime. When there were public executions for pick-pocketing there were pick-pockets working the crowds at the executions.
Oh and, what is the solution when (as in most cases) the rapist isn't caught?
Za
By
Anonymous, at 8:42 PM
I was going to insert this into the original blog but decided against it.
It is interesting that our society holds the raper guilty, the rapee innocent. Under Sharia law it is turned around: the male is innocent, the woman is guilty and she must be stoned to death.
By
Marcel, at 6:06 AM
Marty's statement that the death penalty has never reduced crime is false and has no factual basis. It sells short scheming murderers and cleaver lawyers with a lifetime to appeal. Also, the death penalty is often used as a bargaining chip to solve crimes and get more criminals off our streets. Thinking life in prison without parole is just as effective as the death penalty is naive. Thank goodness California just defeated a proposition to eliminate the death penalty.
I am anti abortion (not pro life) with the only exception being when the life of the mother is threatened. Rape is a terrible crime that can permanently damage the victim psychologically and physically with an STD or pregnancy or both. It is my personal belief that if a pregnancy results from a rape it should be carried to term and the mother should decide the disposition of the baby, keep or place in adoption. The victim is violated by the rapist not the fetus.
By
John Beauregard, at 4:22 PM
Gretchen - You say your pro choice stance extends to all choices. Does ALL include school vouchers, guns, light bulbs, soft drink cup sizes and health insurance? I'm just wondering where you stand.
By
John Beauregard, at 5:30 PM
I am pro-choice, however I feel everyone is entitled to a good education and I fear that a voucher program would only make our bad schools worse. I really don't know enough about it to vote on it but if required I could learn more. I believe that people should be allowed to own guns, within reason. No one needs a machine gun or any of the military style guns out on the street today. I believe that everyone is entitled to health care, and would like to see the concept of health insurance abolished. As for light bulbs, automobiles, food items, shopping on Thanksgiving I firmly believe in free market, if people are willing to buy it, sell it.
By
Gretchen, at 7:09 PM
Very reasonable. You ARE pro choice on ALL things except those that violate your principals. Pretty much the way I feel too although our principals do not co-align perfectly.
By
John Beauregard, at 9:19 PM
Marty,
Your statement that the "death penalty has never reduced crime."
Recidivisim is a major problem in our society: from those that have served their sentances and those that have been let out on parole. About every six months we read about a released rapist that rapes again. The person raped pays for society's lax laws. The rest of us sleep good at night because we do not directly feel the brunt of such lax laws.
By
Marcel, at 8:57 AM
John, let me clarify how I feel about guns, I hate them. They terrify me, and people with guns terrify me even more. I would never allow a gun in my home and the thought that one of my daughters may fall in love with someone who wants/has a gun makes me sick to my stomach. However, I know that my personal fear/dislike of guns should not take precedence over someone else's right to own one.
By
Gretchen, at 11:08 AM
Gretchen - Many people feel as you do but some also want guns banned. Our neighbor was in the precious gem business and he was anti gun even though he often transported gems. He was shot and killed by a robber who knew he was unarmed. A close friend's devorced daughter was murdered by her ex. She was unarmed even though her life was threatened by her ex. Our son David is a comercial airline pilot. Since 9/11/01 comercial pilots are allowed to carry a gun in flight to protect their aircraft and it's passengers. If your life is imminently threatened by someone what would you personally do? What if someone in your family was killed do you think you would feel the same about guns?
By
John Beauregard, at 9:49 AM
For every story of someone without a gun being killed,there is another story of someone being accidentally shot. One never knows what they would do in a situation until they are in that situation. But I know that I could not sleep at night if there was a loaded gun in my house.
But then again, I don't think I have the right to tell others how they should feel.
By
Gretchen, at 6:51 PM
Gretchen,
You stated, that for every person without a gun being killed there is another that is killed by accident. Those stories are not equivalent, one does not balance out the other. There are guns in the right hands that save lives, police for instance, that understand gun safety and fields of fire. There are guns in the wrong hands, street gangs for instance, that have not had courses or any training in gun safety, who only understand safety as, do not point the gun at yourself when pulling the trigger. We as citizens must use discernment as to which kind of hand did the firing. Yes, lets get the guns out of the hands of those that might do harm to citizens. However, if you would not sleep at night if there was a gun in your house then do not have one there. We are free in this Country to do as we please, unlike Switerland where every household must have a rifle.
By
Marcel, at 7:28 AM
The Swiss seem to know that "Guns don't kill people". Also "Swiss Army Knives don't kill people." But they are pretty handy for carrying in your pocket. Except for using as an ad hoc hammer, I can't think of a handy use for carrying a gun around.
Tim B (not signed in)
By
Anonymous, at 7:18 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home