SeanRenaud's tags:
SeanRenaud's most popular posts:
SeanRenaud reads (9):
Who's reading SeanRenaud (175):

RAPE BABIES

SeanRenaud posted on Sep 01, 2008 | views: 642 | Tags: abortion, rape, crime rates, negro, prokill, rapist want parental rights to rape baby, ignorance, babies
This post is primarly focused a single individual but anybody who uses this argument is free to chime in with their half cent worth of knowledge.
 
The argument is that abortion should be kept legal for the reason that what if a woman is raped and gets pregnant should she be forced to carry the child to term?  I'm not going to attack the moral validity of this argument, I'm pro-choice 110%.  What attacking is the myth of rape babies.  According to the US government http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_and_aftermath_of_rape 5% of rapes cause a pregnancy.  Depending on your stats roughly 300k women are raped each year http://www.rainn.org/statistics.  There are 1.37 million aborted children every year in the United States. 
 
What this means for you all is that even if each and every raped woman became pregnant (which doesn't happen for a myriad of reasons)  that would still mean that roughly for every 300 thousand rape babies there are 1 million aborted for other reasons (and the real number is likely much closer to 15000 rape babies per million.  The number is so low that it isn't worthy of discussion.
 
The question of abortion is quite simple.  Wether it is is rational and moral to end/prevent one human life to prevent the suffering of other human lives.  Talking about rape babies just makes you a knee jerk, emotional human being who is unworthy of being a part of a civilized adult conversation. 
 
The exact same thing goes for people who want to talk about partial birth abortions.  They are again a myth made up for propaganda.  I don't care if you were the one, it sucks to be you but laws shouldn't be based on the relatively isolated incidents. 
 
I'm pro-choice all the way but if the reason why you are pro-choice is rape babies and not women's rights, not  human suffering, not even the simple economics or the correlation to lower crime then you're backing the wrong horse.  All by the most staunch pro-lifers would support special terms that would allow for a rape victim to get an abortion.
 
http://www.soulcast.com/post/show/141984/a-response-to-LENNY-on-SoulCast
 
This has been a very special fuck you to the newest person to add my to their ignore list, even after my praises and in defense of an anonymous poster.  Maybe I finally made a wrong call and this anon was a genuine person but really being an anon automaticlaly kills your credibility, and lets be fair possibly moreso than any other poster in SC history I have my personal trolls. 
 
 


send to a friend del.icio.us Digg reddit StumbleUpon

Comments

  • stopmediabias said on Sep 01, 2008....

    I am a little unclear as to your position but I think I understand.  You are stating that because rape pregnancies are so rare as with partial birth abortions then it shouldn't be a part of the overall abortion debate.

    I am against virtually every form of abortion known.  If 300,000 woman are getting raped every year we have a much bigger problem than 15,000 of these woman getting pregnant.  I agree with you in a sense though that it is a different argument with a different set of circumstances.

    I personally don't believe the actions of a rapist should be pushed onto an unborn child.  The punishment for rape should be equal or worse than actual rape and it is not.

    From an ideological standpoint with subjects like guns, punishment, abortion, it is kind of interesting how less liberalism would diminish rape pregnancies.  How many woman would get raped if they were all trained and carried firearms?  How many woman would get raped if every convicted rapist got his dick sliced off and replaced with a plastic tube? 

    As far a rape, can you say adding the emotional and moral implications of killing and unborn child to a rape victim as helping woman?

     

  • SeanRenaud said on Sep 01, 2008....
    I know your stance on abortion SMB and I disagree.  But I see a lot of people who are pro-choice because of rape babies and they are so exceedingly rare that you can't justifythe process because of it any more than you can legalize murder because sometimes it's in self defense.
     
    On the opposite extreme if your main reason for being pro-life is partial birth abortions you're again talking about something so rair that it doesn't make sense to use them as your central argument and it pisses me off.
  • Expendable said on Sep 01, 2008....
    In the US, 4.7% or 32,000 rapes result in pregnancies each year. So I'd say there's more rape babies than partial birth abortions - it's not as rare. And in many of the cases you hear in the news it's a child who wouldn't be allowed to carry a gun.
     
     
    But there's better reasons for having an abortion.

    Let's not forget the toll pregnancy takes on the mother, the stress put on the heart, lungs, kidneys and liver. If it was a tumor or parasite, nobody'll object to getting it cut out of you. But it's "ok" when it's a baby? Did you know the maternal death rate rose higher than it's been for 90 years in the US?

  • SeanRenaud said on Sep 01, 2008....
    4.7%. of 32,000 is 1504 pregnancies per year.  Asumming that every single one of them was aborted (which they aren't) that would sitll be a drop in the bucket of the 1.37 abortions per year wouldn't it Expendable?
     
    I would like to mention AGAIN that I am strongy pro-choice.  My debate here is specifically with people who care pro-choice solely because "what if a woman gets raped should she be punished."  Statistically it happens so rarely that it's really silly for it to be central to an argument.
     
    If 10% of abortions were rape related then maybe it would make a valid point in an inteligent discussion just like if 10% of abortions where late-term partial birth abortions it would be valid.  The only reason the the right continues to try to pass legislation against partial birth is because they understand how hazy the legalities are here and see it as what it is. . . a backdoor.  And it's the only reason the liberals defend it becuase once the enemy has gotten past your outer permeter it becomes infinitely harder to fight them off
  • TinSoldier said on Sep 01, 2008....
    Hmm. I don't completely understand the OP -- you're saying that some people are pro-choice almost solely because of cases of rape or incest?

    While my own views of abortion have softened a bit, I'm still anti-abortion, including in most cases of rape or incest. I see no reason to punish the child for the sins of the father.

    However I am more accepting of very early-term abortions and I no longer believe that it is a human being from the point of conception. It may be hard to point out exactly when, but I do think that it can be defined.
  • SeanRenaud said on Sep 01, 2008....
    Yes that is eactly what I am saying Tin.  And that such people are badly misguided.
     
    I'm additionally saying that rape babies make up to small a percentage of over all abortions that it shouldn't be a  major talking point.
     
  • You're already a mother with kids and don't want another child.
  • You can't afford it.
  • You're single.
  • Your employer will fire you
  • Your body can't take it.
  • You're still a child yourself.
  • Birth Defects.

These things particularly the bolded point are the things we need to be discussing and very little else.

  • TinSoldier said on Sep 01, 2008....
    Sean -- regarding all of your points except for the birth defects one: those are the best arguments for contraception and/or abstinence. I don't believe that abortion is the answer to any of those questions.

    WRT birth defects? That's a bit tougher. I could say that it opens the door too wide to eugenics to me, but WRT to the situation posted I have a hard time saying that it's black and white.
  • SeanRenaud said on Sep 01, 2008....
    I understand your point tin, and I would debate I do while I think that that list is made of valid reasons to get an abortion I also agree with you that they are arguments for contraception.  I'm a believer that a reformed sexual education system would lower unwanted pregnancies and by proxy abortions overnight.
     
    I see your point on birth defect though personally I think that really falls under I can't afford n many cases.  I know two families with children with defects (one Downs, one Cerebral Palsy) I know full well the drain that these children can be and a family that is already struggling with finances doesn't need the additional burder and accidents can and will happen.
     
    Also I hope you don't mind that I erased your WTF along with all of Paris's comments.  We really need to be able to block users before they post cus it's just a matter of time before Britney Spears or Frit76 show up.
     
    But still my point was specifically on the justification of abortion because a raped woman shouldn't be forced to carry to term and all the rest of this is kinda fluff.
  • TinSoldier said on Sep 01, 2008....
    Regarding deletion: I understand completely. I was hoping you would.

    Regarding the rest of the discussion: We can agree on sex ed and probably on expanded availability of contraception.

    Like Obama said, we may not come to agreement on the rightness or wrongness of abortion but we can at least agree (I think) that the need for it should be lessened by other means.
  • Expendable said on Sep 01, 2008....

    Sean, you misread my post. 4.7% of rapes result in pregnancy. About 32,000 a year. Of that, less than half get aborted.

    Tin, a fetus is medically considered viable after 24 weeks.

  • SeanRenaud said on Sep 01, 2008....
    Oh I did misunderstand, but that still doesn't change that the fact that 16k out of 1.37 million is a rather small percentage to be used as a justification.
  • TinSoldier said on Sep 01, 2008....
    Expendable: I wasn't talking about viability.
  • dailyachesandpains said on Sep 01, 2008....
    Okay fellas...when I was preggers with Little D. I had a blood test that implied that she would be born with Downs.  The doctor gave me/us the option to have a test called an "Amnio" done to see if she did have DS.  The risk of the Amnio test was miscarriage.  The doctor told us it's common with the Amnio test.  I think my jaw was on the floor during this "run of the mill" speech he gave us.  I told him that I wanted a child, no matter how he/she came to us and hell freaking NO way would I have the Amnio test done.  We would still love this child just the same.
     
    It turned out that she was born with a birth defect, but not downs.  AND she was misdiagnosed 4 times.  She was born with a CHD, a Congenital Heart Defect and had her first operation at the age of 7 months.  We won't know until she's a bit older if she'll need another operation to correct a valve issue that they say she'll grow into. 
     
    Point is, I took Little D. any possible way she was going to be given to us.  I wasn't going to risk losing her to some horrible test.
     
    Now, my friend recently had an abortion due to a tubular pregnancy.  She had no choice. She was devistated.
     
    Another one of my friends had an abortion because there was no fetus in the sac.  She was growing out as if there were one, but there was nothing there.  She was devistated too. 
     
    I am, myself, pro-choice.  "Rape babies" never even entered my mind when I made my choice.  I just think that there are so many situations that could cause a woman the need to have an abortion that I can't make that decision for any woman.  They need to make it for their own self and in my opinion, their reasons are personal.
     
    Daily 
  • SeanRenaud said on Sep 01, 2008....
    I respect your choice Daily.  I do.  I'm not sure I would have made the same choice but I think you made the right choice for you.  (If you weren't going to abort no matter it it did have (insert birth defect) I don't really see the point in finding out in advance anyway.  Personal opinion.
     
    That said my point here was solely and completely on a single aspect of the of the abortion subject that that aspect is.  "Abortion should be legal because what if a woman is raped?"
     
    I have a personal dislike for people who make decisions based on isolated incidents and I point them out.
  • dailyachesandpains said on Sep 02, 2008....
     
    Sean:  Thank you.  I never thought of the subject matter the way you brought it up.  I think it should be legal just because it should be.  No label should be attached to the "why" it should be legal IMO.  Am I understanding this correctly now?
     
    I'm going on no sleep right now and still medicated, so forgive me.   
     
    About my situation:
    OBGYN's contstantly send pregnant women to have blood taken.  It got to a point where I didn't even ask why because it was so routine.  Had I known it was to see if she had Downs, I never would have bothered because I wouldn't have terminated the pregnancy.  The blood work has to be done at 15 weeks and one day off either way could screw up the results and give false pos/neg on Downs Syndrome.  I was more like 14 weeks. 
     
    Thanks!
    Daily
    P.S.  Why does this page look SO weird with the bullets on replies?  Looks like a copy/paste of another blog. 
  • stopmediabias said on Sep 02, 2008....

    Sean-your a smart guy and you know that I mainly oppose abortion because I believe it is bad for woman, number two falls into the moral implications.  But here is something interesting.  Check out the ABC link.  This is the either proven or unproven fact that there is a link between abortion and breat cancer.  WebMD, Planned Parenthood, etc dismiss the link completely because of a Harvard study that studied a large number of woman who had abortions for a number of years.  The "Harvard" study concluded no link and since then pro-abortionists dismiss, bury, cover-up (almost like evidence of no Global warming threat) any additional evidence.

    Average age of woman who get breast cancer: 60-65

    Average age of woman in Harvard study: forty fucking two!!!!!!!

    So these subhumans because of politics bury this information instead of just a warning people in an unbiased fashion with all the information, they bury it.

    A lot of smart people, doctors and such would base there carreers on the fact there is an ABC link.

    This is why Abortion is so bad, because politics has trumped womans lives. 

  • Expendable said on Sep 02, 2008....

    And yet women who miscarry are at no greater risk of breast cancer. Hmm. You know, I think I've got to go with Havard's peer-reviewed study here, especially as a director of research for the American Cancer Society agrees there's no ABC link. As does two studies, one in Europe and one in Shanghai. Are they all 'in on it'?

  • SeanRenaud said on Sep 02, 2008....
    SMB- This blog really wasn't focused on your side, it was really if anything a pro-life rant.  It was specifically speaking to a particular group or people.  That said I'll indulge you.
     
    The women who get abortions are also poor and often minority.  I would liek to see for example if blacks are more likely to get breast cancer than whites, or if poor (we dont' really know what causes cancer it could be dietary) get cancer.  If the only common link is abortion then by all means it should be explained fully to women before getting it.
     
    I can't get behind your politics has trumped women's lives mantra simply because nobody forces a woman to get an abortion, it's a choice.  We live in the land of the FREE and you're tlaking about taking away a choice.  Politics are on your side my friend.  At least if you'd argued the child's life I could agree to disagree but you're simply wrong on that one.
     
    Expendable:  Bodies are weird, as similar as a miscarraige and an abortion are they are not the same so it wouldn't be entirely shocking if they had different tolls on the body in the long term
  • stopmediabias said on Sep 02, 2008....

    Expendable-The study followed woman who had abortions, then measured instances of breast cancer and found no connection. BUT in this country the average age a woman gets breast cancer is in thier 60's and the average age of the woman in the study were in their 40's.  Is that a reasonable study to just dismiss the ABC link?

    Sean-I'm honestly trying to understand because I think you are a reasonable person.  I would assume that someone who is more to the left on social issues would be against abortion for this reason and this reason only:

    When a woman is faced with the news that she is pregnant, when pregnant is the worst thing in the world she is faced with a whole host of things, physically, emotionally, changes in hormones, all of this, all at once, and most of the time has to face it alone.  I would make the case that a woman's capacity for rational thought is greatly diminished by the trauma of the situation and based on that the choice should not be allowed because there is a very high chance the choice is going to harm them.  If woman decided genital mutilation should be a choice because it is their body I think we would have something to say about that.

    I'm against abortion but recognize it is here.  If there is even the slightest hint of an ABC link is it a violation of a woman's alleged right to choose to inform them if it?

  • SeanRenaud said on Sep 02, 2008....
     
    If the study found no other links I say send it in for peer review and if it holds up add it to the information that you are giving the women.  Tell them the hard numbers of how likely it is.  I'm NEVER against information being provided to people.  I'm against propaganda and out of context information.  Example:  Pretty much anything the Pro-Life side uses talking about partial-birth abortions and the gruesome act that it is.  The think tanks behind the movement know that this is a rare procedure and is usually done because the mother's health is in question.  They use it as an example because it gets a gut reaction.  It is the polar opposite to rape babies and I abhor both extremes because they don't talk about what the issue is and the issue is economics.  Almost always and that is what needs to be addressed. 
     
    I don't think that most women have to face pregnancy alone.  I see your point about it being truamatic but I'm not sure what the best answer is to this.  I believe she has a right to determine her future and that a mistake shouldn't mean that she HAS to change her entire life plan.  It should be her choice and hers alone.  I wouldn't be against counseling if it weren't for two things.  One most of the people who want to have conseling are strongly pro-life and it should just be the information given to her, not someone trying to talk her in or out of it as much as possible it needs to be a neutral person.  The second is that this is a time sensitive issue, it becomes harder if you wait more than twelve weeks.  You make a solid point on them not being in a rational state of mind but at some point you have to trust that the woman knows what she's doing.  There is a powerful biological need in women to have children, the fact that her mind is overriding millions of years of/God installed instincts is a strong statement in and of itself.
     
    Ultimately if a woman decided that genital mutilation should be a choice we don't have a right to get in the way of that.  Currently we infact don't, just like if a guy wants to get a Prince Albert peircing (if you don't know google I'm not explaining it) we don't legislate against it.  We ignore it.
     
    Again I agree that all pertinent information should be given to women and if the ABC is proven it should be added.  If it's a high end rumor (like vaccinations cause autism) then I think it's best either left out or put out as some scientist believe there is a link between.
     
    Your point on the left should be against abortion for that reason. . .actually makes sense.  By the same token I would expect the right to be pro-choice because they are "supposedly" for a smaller government that does as little as possible.
     
    If you are only hurting yourself with an action then it shouldn't be illegal.  It's not my bussiness, nor the governments if you want to shoot up with drugs and kill yourself. 
  • Scaramouche said on Sep 05, 2008....
    Here I was thinking your tagline was a complete sentence, phrased in the imperative, urging the SoulCast populace to sexually violate infants!  Damn you for dashing my hopes!
  • silverwhisper said on Sep 07, 2008....
    i know a lot of liberals, sean. not for any of them is the prospect of rape babies the overriding issue.

    for most of them, self-determination and not having someone else's morality foisted upon them is.

    ed
  • SeanRenaud said on Sep 07, 2008....
    It seems it gets brought up often enough and I know it's not the conservatives bringing it up.
     
     
  • McCain said on Sep 08, 2008....

    YO... DOG!

    Stick to building  me up till election day. Rape Babies is nothin but a side show!

    I got your lingo down...DOG! Lets kick BLACK OBAMS ASS!

    he be ah BITCH!

    talk to ya later...DOG!

  • Scaramouche said on Sep 08, 2008....
    Hmm.  I like it.  I see a bumper sticker;

    JOHN McCAIN RAPES BABIES

    Sweet...
  • starchini said on Sep 12, 2008....

    Seany,  I do not think that legalizing murder bc sometimes its in self defense has anything to do with wether or not u are pro choice bc once in a while its ok to abort rape babies...  Murder in fact IS ok if it is in self defense and Abortion is OK if it threatens the mothers life or is the product of rape...But as it is now Murder is illegal and Abortion is not.  U bring up a good point...Abortion should be treated like Murder laws.  Aborting a baby is legal if its a product of rape or risks the mothers life but anything other than that should be illegal...Just like Murdering someone who is a direct threat to your life is legal...Im pro changing the laws.  I am not pro choice in general...only is the mother life is in danger.  I think that if a woman is raped and is pregnant she should not be allowed an abortion.  Even though the daddy isnt ideal, it is still a perfectly healthy baby that can be cared for like anyother, consider it artificial insemination....I think the absolute only reason a mother would be allowed to abort was if her life was in danger....just like murder....So am i pro choice or not? 

  • starchini said on Sep 12, 2008....

    I think im not pro choice... I dont support anybodies right to kill human life, hehe, unless it might kill them first...I used to be pro choice bc of womens rights to choose...but...damn...choose to go on the pill or choose to be abstinant or something...If u dont want a kid that badly and think aborting it is ok bc its ur body...its just fucked up...I believe i changed my mind when a friend of mine sent me a video of an abortion happening at only a month or two...even that early it still looks like a human, tiny ity bitty feet and everything...I had no idea...i still thought it was a blob of tissue that early...its not...its a real human....its heartbreaking what i saw in that video...this itty bitty person no bigger than a nickel was ripped from the womb all bc mommy was irresponsible...

  • Scaramouche said on Sep 12, 2008....
    So - if it's a human at that point, let's have a doctor carefully and delicately remove it from the womb without doing it any harm, then you can take it home in a shoebox and see how long it survives.
  • SeanRenaud said on Sep 12, 2008....
    Don't go that route Scar.  We live in a world where cloning is possible.  Your haircut could soon be a viable human being.
  • Scaramouche said on Sep 14, 2008....
    SHHHHH!!  Don't give ideas to these violent psychopaths!  Once they start thinking about the daily slaughter of countless quintillions of innocent, helpless dermal papilla cells they'll start fire-bombing barber shops!  No hairdresser will be safe!
  • starchini said on Sep 15, 2008....
    so no comment for me?  darn...i wanted to know what u thought of my opinion sean.
  • SeanRenaud said on Sep 15, 2008....
    You're pretty much standard in line with the average conservative on this Star.  I understand your point.  Not that I would ever want to reverse Roe v. Wade and take that choice awaomf rom women but honestly I would be willing to cede a little bit if the proponents of pro-life weren't the same people who don't want the pill to be available and up until very recently even cried out against the rhythm method, which is basically not having sex when a woman is likely to get pregnant.  These are the same people who cut funding for AIDS prevention organizations that handed out condoms.  These are the same people who complained that an HPV vaccine which could aid in preventing cancer would turn women into sluts and are actively trying to block it. 
     
     
  • staroni said on Jun 16, 2009....
    It is bad enough when a child is conceived from rape, but when the rapist wants his parentsl rights to the child is wrong.  The child may not have been conceived with love, but is surely a creation of God's love, and deserves to be protected from the rapist father.  And the mother should not have to have the man who raped her in her life for the next 18 years, sharing joint custody and visitation with her and the child.  This happened in Raceland, Louisiana.  And they did not even prosecute him because he found a loophole to cover up his crime.  He is  borderlilne mentally retarded with an IQ of around 70, and not responsible for his actions.  He cannot comprehend right from wrong, and does not understand the consequenses of his actions.  Yet he is a certified welder, pipe fitter, was married build a home, raised a family, taught them morals, and he claimes he is not responsible.  He only used the 70 IQ as a way to beat the law for his crime, and not be prosecuted.  The same law that was to protect her from a rapist like him, protected him, and she ended up with no rights at all, and no help.  Just told to live with it.  How do we protect this baby conceived from rape from the rapist???

    • Comment on "RAPE BABIES"


    (Separate tags using commas, for example: New York, dating, vegetarian)

    Tax Dollars For Abortion Under Obamacare

    stopmediabias posted on Feb 28, 2010 | views: 38 | Tags: abortion, politics, Obamacare
    The new healthcare reform bill being tossed around now as federal funding for abortion and Americans don't want it.... read entire post 2 comments

    GREEN ISN"T ALWAYS GREEN

    andreaspeak posted on Feb 16, 2010 | views: 15 | Tags: rape, denial, PTSD, commentary, parenting
    This is an article that looks at familial denial and how it impacts trauma survivors. Written in a mixed-genre style, it uses first person narrative, somewhat humorous commentary and the theoretical.... read entire post 0 comments