abortion, rape, and guns.

so i've been on a few of these recent abortion threads started in response to the new laws that some states have passed that significantly restrict abortion.

i have been opposed to abortion for most of my adult life, since i knew what an abortion is - murdering the most innocent and precious among us. i do make an exception in the case of rape, incest, and for the life of the mother (like president reagan stated, and now just recently president trump).

i also support the right of a citizen to equip herself with the tools to defend her own body from a rape or other sexual assault. i find it interesting that many of the folks on the "pro choice" side of the argument go on and on about defending "womens rights" but when directly asked if that includes her right to carry a loaded gun in public, they go silent.

better to not get raped, in my view, than to have to make that awful decision to abort a rape pregnancy, yeah?

so let's hear it, "pro choicers." do you defend ALL of womens rights or just SOME of them? why or why not?

 

i'm not actually expecting to hear from anyone. which kind of proves my point. but go ahead, prove me wrong "choice" advocates...

 

That's what a rape whistle is for don't you know...

 

As I stated in the other thread, I have no problem with you carrying a gun to protect yourself. It's your CHOICE. I'm not FORCING you to carry the gun for nine months in your uterus, however.

 

I support a womams right to her body and the ability to defend it...just as I hope she does mine. You are reaching in this thread however and make little sense.

 

I find that if you make a good point, things often go silent from the left and you are ignored. I've come to believe silence is the equivalent of "we have nothing".

 

i'll blow it after the monster's skull has been aerated by my .357JHP.

 

so what would you say to all the potential rape victims in california whose state government will not allow them to protect themselves from rapists? illinois, new york city, mass, as well...

 

so you oppose gun control and support constitutional carry?

 

the problem is that the op is not "reaching". the reality is that most of those who support a woman's right to the use of lethal force to rid herself of an unwanted pregnancy do not support her right to lethal force in order to prevent it. rape is constantly extended to excuse the use of child murder as a viable alternative to simple birth control, but the idea of self-protection is consistently denied as a reason to maintain a constitutionally protected right.

 

Prove you are pro choice for guns and women's rights.
Afterall, rights are rights, yes?
And if you are for women's rights under a few circumstances, why not for a woman's rights under her's and her doctors circumstances?

 

non sequitur. there is, expressed and implied, a right to defend one's own person from violence, assault, rape, etc.. there is no such right expressed or implied to take the life of another (regardless of his/her age or gestational state).

the irony of your position is that you imagine a right where none exists, and deny one where it does.

 

How did you get that out of my simple post?

Regardless, I own a gun. support the right to have one (within reason) and though I am unsure what "Constitutional Carry" entails in your mind yes.

 

It its a non sequiter, then why are we having this discussion.
A fetus in a womb has never been legally defined as a human person being.

The right exists with the living legally defined human person being, the future potential mother. With consultation with her human person being doctor.
When were you given the role of some god?

 

The irony here is to watch a woman champion the removal of bodity freedoms from other women.

 

you claim you support my right to defend my body. hence, you need to oppose gun control and support constitutional carry.

if you are unclear about constitutional carry, this does a pretty good job of explaining it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_carry

 

what "bodily freedom" is there to murder another person?

 

I suppose I must be terribly uninformed as I have NEVER seen or heard of this.

 

I think most every person would support lethal force to stop a rape. A problem I can see, is if the alleged rapist is dead, it becomes hard to prove it was in defense of rape.
And then, how many unintended deaths would occur from those who are fairly clueless in how a gun operates or how to operate a gun safely?
Guns are very dangerous in the hands of the untrained.

 

because this is a debate forum? and that's what we do?

i believe it should be

i believe it should not. once you create another human being, either intentionally or through "oopsie" the condom broke, you have still created another human being.

 

I notice you mistakenly, intentionally or deviously left out the words child or baby, imagine that!
Afterall, rights are rights, yes

 

I do not believe you get to tell me what I can think. I do support your rights but also do not think people need assault rifles.

 

The issue becomes, what gives this newly created “human” the right to reside in another human, and use them for sustenance? This is the legal point of contention, which makes abortion legal. No “human” has such a right to reside inside the body of another.

 

except gavin newsom, kate brown, jay inslee, nancy pelosi, andrew cuomo, bill deblasio, eric garcetti, and EVERY SINGLE DEMORAT RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT.

there is always a risk. i refuse to be a victim, however, and i have already accepted the calculated risk of carrying a firearm. every gun owner and carrier needs to assess that risk for their own situation.

no person should carry a gun if they are unfamiliar with its operation and the very important safety rules (the NRA safety rules I should add).

\
well, one thing we agree on.

 

OK. I believe you are wrong.
And you even think you are wrong in some circumstances.
No, a human being is not created when the condom breaks and happens to fertilize an egg. A process begins that will probably become a legal human being if all things go correctly. Which doesn't always happen, even if the mother wants it to.
The laws need to be based on physics, science, and evidence. Not on one's emotions.
So, thread done.