In response to:

Legitimate Rape Arguments

Gus85 Wrote: Aug 27, 2012 1:09 PM
So starting with *A* you advise the use of sophistry. Have you considered being a politician ? I don't think every human has the same value. I don't support abortion but even less I like imposing force on woman.
inkling_revival Wrote: Aug 27, 2012 1:18 PM
The victim of rape is already restricted from planning and executing the murder of her rapist. Do you disapprove? If not, then you already agree that there should be some restriction on the victim's rights to respond to her victimization, as required by the rules of moral civilization.

We simply extend that limit to other, innocent victims. If the fact that she has been victimized does not make it alright to murder her assailant, how much less does it make it alright to murder her offspring?
Mother of 4 -- the original Wrote: Aug 27, 2012 1:13 PM
Only the rapist "imposed force" on the woman.

Those who assert the injustice inherent to executing an innocent child for his/her father's crime are only asserting that her victimization does not grant her the right to victimize another.
JesusHChrist Wrote: Aug 27, 2012 1:37 PM
Ahhh...semantics in lieu of argument: "executing" and "innocent" "child".

...how about "disposing" of a "non existent" "potential fetus".

Anominus Wrote: Aug 27, 2012 1:52 PM
How can you dispose of that which does not exist?

A "potential fetus" is still a living, human organism. If at any point it isn't human or alive, then it no longer has the potential to be anything more than dead matter.
inkling_revival Wrote: Aug 27, 2012 2:00 PM
"semantics in lieu of argument: "

Nope. She made a perfectly reasonable argument: the only force being imposed on anybody is the rape itself. Victimhood does not confer instant rights to commit further crimes.

Anything to say about the argument? Or are you going to continue to pretend that the argument lies entirely in the semantics?
Mother of 4 -- the original Wrote: Aug 27, 2012 2:22 PM
If the fetus doesn't exist the woman isn't pregnant.
Todd Akin’s grossly irresponsible remarks about “legitimate rape” and conception have received much media attention. As well they should. The sheer weirdness of the remarks calls into question both his intelligence and his personal integrity. How could someone conclude logically that a rape victim’s body has the capacity to prevent conception in the wake of sexual assault? And why would someone assert that the conclusion had been supported by doctors with whom he had spoken? Clearly, Akin contrived the idea on the spot and then contrived the claim that there were doctors who had informed and/or supported his assertion. All of...