His answer to the question was yes. His daughter would keep the baby.

No further comment.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5776182&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5307129#49276026)

and aside from the insincerity, it's obviously just bad policy. no sane person wants the law to COMPEL this outcome.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5776182&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5307129#49276057)

When you say “killing someone other than the rapist,” are you talking about a fertilized egg that hasn’t even developed a brain or a beating heart?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5776182&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5307129#49278230)

either answer you win: they look retarded, or they prove they don't actually believe life begins at conception

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5776182&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5307129#49278339)

https://19thnews.org/2023/09/poll-abortion-americans-complex-views/

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5776182&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5307129#49276060)

Otherwise, abort.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5776182&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5307129#49276065)

evangelicals don't actually believe this, they just needed some culture war bullshit four decades ago

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5776182&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5307129#49278342)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5776182&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5307129#49278206)

Rape is horrible. Child rape even worse. How does that justify a murder though?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5776182&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5307129#49278236)

lisps that killing a caterpillar is completely different from killing a butterfly

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5776182&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5307129#49278306)

in other words, your examples are inapposite

i like how you have to go to an example that represents .0000000000001% of pregnancies each year to attempt to make a point

usually, people making your argument are in favor of abortions for all pregnant women and make this argument disingenuously. i'm sure you are an exception.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5776182&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5307129#49278355)

however, i think if the mother's life is actually in danger to a realistic degree, whatever that means, i think abortion is not only an option, but the better decision.

if the mother did not consent to the intercourse, i find it difficult to justify the state getting involved in her decision to end the pregnancy, even if i hope she keeps the child

because the health of the mother is determined by a doctor and not the state's business

and because the mother's agency in getting pregnant is not the state's business,

i think it follows that there must remain some avenue for a pregnancy to be ended by the mother

for a genuine health issue, assuming c section or some other option is not available, then that could be abortion up to birth. i'm not a doctor. i don't know if there actually can be a situation where the mother's life is at risk that isn't known until birth

for the "rape" situations, abortion should be as soon as possible if that's the course the mother wishes to take. however, imagine a mother doesn't know if the child is her husband's or her rapist's. should she be forced to abort before the dna of the baby can be determined in utero? that doesn't seem fair or right for the state to take that consideration away from her

for a minor's situation, the parents must be involved. the state has no business forcing an abortion, so charlie's position that he would want the 10 year old to carry the baby must be permitted, unless there is no way for this to happen without risking the mother's life. i don't think that's likely.

because the state should not dissuade the reporting of rape, i think the option for abortion must be available for rape victims

because all but the very young know when they've been raped, it follows that perhaps the very young or those without sufficient capacity get a longer time to have an abortion than those with more capacity

very complicated subject with the pro choice crowd coming across as a bunch of scum when they do not recognize that their position does kill a life and the pro life crowd coming across as a bunch of religious zealots who don't appreciate the potential harm and disrespect taking away a personal choice creates.

at least those choosing abortions tend to be democrats and children tend to vote as their parents

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5776182&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5307129#49280162)

But while we’re on the topic, what if an out-of-control trolley is heading down the same hill as an infinitely large cum load, and at the bottom of the hill are assembled an infinite number of eggs, your daughter, and an infinite number of Hitlers? Which switch do you pull, tough guy?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5776182&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5307129#49278485)

hitler babies have the potential to be hitler adults or something else

i would not sacrifice my daughter

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5776182&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5307129#49280166)

I also never argued in favor of choice, and I didn't bring up the rape exception. You could apply these examples to non rape cases too.

Finally, I don't think I've ever heard a pro choice person make these points. Comparing one's position to bombing innocent children isnt the best argument politically, even if logically sound.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5776182&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5307129#49278957)

i don't think killing an innocent should make you feel better about being raped. but, i also appreciate that many people disagree.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5776182&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5307129#49280176)

You seem fixated on the age of the aggressor (I.e child soldier and juvenile attacker). Use of deadly force can be justified to protect your own or another’s life. In the child rape victim pregnancy, terminating the baby’s life is not necessary to protect the mother’s life and does not undo the rape. This is why it’s consistent to be pro life and allow for an exception where carrying the child to term risks the life of the mother.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5776182&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5307129#49281136)

Now same question if their dad is a 6'5" white millionaire married to their smoke show wife?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5776182&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5307129#49279053)

The correct answer to the hypothetical is that you tearfully, but dutifully, kill the daughter and her unborn bastard spawn to preserve the honor of your family’s name and the virtue of your other daughters and wives. Subsequently, you organize your kinsmen into a posse to track down the rapist and kill him in a cartoonishly violent and painful public manner.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5776182&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5307129#49278444)