My bad, not exactly a majority. But a very high percentage.
http://www.returnofkings.com/22079/the-truth-about-false-rape-accusations-that-all-men-should-know
Abortion Should Be Illegal
- Thread starter Lyfe
- Start date
- Status
http://www.returnofkings.com/22079/the-truth-about-false-rape-accusations-that-all-men-should-know
That site literally links wikipedia as it's source which in turn estimates 2-10% of all rape accusations to be fake. So far away from a majority.
So, just to clarify. You think that all abortion should be illegal except for instances of rape?[DOUBLEPOST=1567896275][/DOUBLEPOST]
Read the article. Don't skim it.
I don't need to read a page called returnofthekings.
The first part of the "article" is already so full of "facts" which are not scientifically proven and it presents numbers that are very far off from every other scientific report.
Other studies have arrived at figures as high as 90%, such as Stewart (1981), who considered one case disproved because: “It was totally impossible to have removed her extremely tight undergarments from her extremely large body against her will.” I wonder if she lives near Nigel?
Sorry but this is just a pile of nonsense and studies with very questionable methods.
I'm not getting involved in this thread as a lot of comments have been personally upsetting to me, mostly the recent ones of you minimising the severity of rape claims by saying most of them are fake claims.
Maybe you cannot relate to how that sensation feels and how traumatising it can be, at least that's understandable and something that shouldn't be taken for granted but don't make generalising sweeps with very little understanding or valid research.
But I would love to have a shared giggle at the source you just posted, it seems very balanced, unbiased and definitely a great source of information.
...
Whatever bro. You still have no argument.
I mean I think the first thing I wrote here was that there are different arguments for and against abortion. And that everybody has different morals which changes what he values more. Therefore society as a whole has to come to a conclusion together and has to stop arguing. For now society values the life of the mother more. And that is one of the only facts i have seen in this entire thread.
Also from the beginning I said that making rape the posterchild for or against abortion is a stupid thing, since it affects so few people.
So I don't need any arguments since there are a) none that will change your mind since you watched a youtube video and b) since none of you posted anything scientific to argue about.
But posting sketchy sources definitely isn't worth anything.
And I am saying that if you're proactive that fast (rape kits only work for a short time) you can use Plan B instead of getting an abortion. Plan B works for up to 5 days.
Yes and I agree with that. (Even tho plan b could be considered causing an abortion as well) But it's not what you originally said and what I replied to.
Also what do you do if plan B doesn't work?
Plan B is not an abortion. It stops the egg from being fertilized.
As for if it doesn't work, let's lay out the unlikelihood of this situation.
1) The woman has to get raped and want an abortion. Rape is already an extremely low (<0.7%) cause for why people get abortions.
2) The Plan B has to not work. Plan B almost always works if you take it in a timely manner.
3) The pregnancy has to occur. Most times, having sex doesn't produce a child.
We are talking about an unlikely situation happening because a REALLY unlikely situation happened because a REALLY REALLY unlikely situation happened. The odds of this scenario actually occurring are incredibly low. However, even if it does, the fetus is still a human life.
There are some theries to it but doesn't matter. plan B shouldn't be an abortion, yes.
And to your other points I said multiple times already that rape abortions are such a rare case that it is useless to talk or argue about them. Sadly it always domes back as something to argue about, instead of arguing about any of the other things you have to consider in this debate.
Also in my opinion the life of the mother is valued higher than the life of a child.
And how would you stop the mother from treating the unborn baby badly (especially if it is a rape baby)?
This is a particularly pointless argument, at least in my opinion. A key aspect of liberty and freedom is the core principle of "Your freedoms end where mine begin". Why should the rights of an unborn child/fetus be deemed as less important than its mother's? Being denied the ability to get an abortion is not a violation of your rights, it's simply the enforcement of the unborn child's. If this is not the case, then why is a murder where the victim is a pregnant woman get charged as double-homicides? A woman has the right to control ***her own*** body, not the body of the fetus/child. It's sickening to me that people are willing to place convenience or negligence above a human life.
Also, as for the adoption system, it definitely is not perfect in its current state but last time I checked, it's not as bad as being killed. Perhaps we could use the Planned Parenthood abortion funding to instead allocate more resources to helping the unborn/children instead of enabling their undeserved deaths?
I generally have 3 circumstances where I'd say that abortion is acceptable:
1. Poses a medically significant risk to the mother's life
2. Rape/Incest
3. Child is known to be very sick or will be majorly deformed at birth (Including genetic diseases/issues)
Among all others, the person that often gets hurt the most is the mother herself for regretting her decision and many who go ahead with an abortion end up regretting it. Abortion has been overly normalized/accepted by the world as this easy no-harm process which should be used for anything, but the reality is that it's a gruesome procedure that obviously can't be undone in the future. There is nearly almost always a better way.
Abortion is often associated to "murdering of an innocent life". So let's define what murder is.
Okay. What is a human being however? Is a fetus or unborn child in its early stages of a woman's pregnancy considered as such?
Child... so what is a child?
A fetus is obviously below the age of puberty or the legal age of majority. It also states a son or daughter of any age. So by google's definition of murder, Abortion is indeed the act of murder.
But. I will stray from this string of definitions to go as far as to say that personally I would leave the choice of abortion to the female harboring such life. Rather than forcing a woman to go through with abortion unless under many agreed circumstances such as if the child were to be born (her life would be in danger), I would go with a broad stroke and allow the choice to be made by the woman as having a child is no joke and will result in life changing consequences to her (and her male partner if he is there).
If we have the ability to use contraceptives for women and men to have sexual pleasures without the consequence of a child, why would we force upon the statistical anomaly that the contraceptives failed or the absence of such is to be paid with the price of raising a child. Think of the financial situation and emotional burden of a mother having to tell her child, I am too poor, your father left us or is abusive, etc.
The life inside of a woman does not harbor the superior mental development that defines a human being from an animal according to google. This is my say in this matter, I am leaving this thread unwatched.
Okay. What is a human being however? Is a fetus or unborn child in its early stages of a woman's pregnancy considered as such?
Child... so what is a child?
A fetus is obviously below the age of puberty or the legal age of majority. It also states a son or daughter of any age. So by google's definition of murder, Abortion is indeed the act of murder.
But. I will stray from this string of definitions to go as far as to say that personally I would leave the choice of abortion to the female harboring such life. Rather than forcing a woman to go through with abortion unless under many agreed circumstances such as if the child were to be born (her life would be in danger), I would go with a broad stroke and allow the choice to be made by the woman as having a child is no joke and will result in life changing consequences to her (and her male partner if he is there).
If we have the ability to use contraceptives for women and men to have sexual pleasures without the consequence of a child, why would we force upon the statistical anomaly that the contraceptives failed or the absence of such is to be paid with the price of raising a child. Think of the financial situation and emotional burden of a mother having to tell her child, I am too poor, your father left us or is abusive, etc.
The life inside of a woman does not harbor the superior mental development that defines a human being from an animal according to google. This is my say in this matter, I am leaving this thread unwatched.
Attachments
If you think a woman should not have to be forced into parental responsibilities do you think a man could too? I.E. relinquish parental rights and not have to pay child support.
Im a Liberal and I am against abortion
- Status
