Quote (Santara @ 18 Apr 2022 11:28)
I'd opine that it's still a human being inside her, and that she doesn't have to follow a wrong with another one, that she can offer up the child for adoption as the child has done no wrong.
But even from a libertarian perspective, such a pregnancy isn't begun out of consensual action and could be considered cause for ending.
She's 20. I am not quite 50 yet, that would be my brother.
as an obviously caring father, i assume you were around when your wife / gf was pregnant with your daughter - so you know what kind of physical and mental stress even an "ideal" pregnancy, one without complications, expecting a healthy child, which both parents are looking forward to, already is.
while i don't find it impossible to believe that there are women out there who would actually (not just virtue signalling regarding a hypothetical scenario) choose to have a rapist's / close family member's baby, without receiving any external pressure to do so, i'd be shocked to learn if that was even close to a majority - and i find it outright disgusting to judge, let alone punish them for it.
now i'm not trying to suggest here that a majority of abortions are performed on rape / incest victims, that'd be dishonest, but those do unfortunately happen - and there is obviously a lot of grey area between those extremes and ideal scenarios. my position is that it should always be the woman's choice, no matter what the circumstances are. yours is the opposite: a woman should always be forced (under threat of punishment by the state) to have the baby, no matter what (after all there's the wonderful foster care and adoption system to take care of it) - after nine potentially gruelling months of all kinds of psychological and physical pain that can easily destroy a life.
to be clear, i'm not trying to suggest you find a sick joy in women suffering from the kind of legislation you support, and i'm sure you mean well and think this is the "lesser evil" - but i have to say that this notion is so ridiculously out of touch, so naive and simplistic, so driven by ideology and ultimately cruel, that i find it difficult to understand how any halfway intelligent and empathic person could cheer for such draconian and backward legislation.
let's not forget the context here: this isn't legislation specifically focused on "convenience" abortions (something i think a vast majority of people, me included, clearly oppose in theory), this is not happening in an environment where all other means are exhausted to prevent unwanted pregnancies (quite the opposite, lawmakers trying to punish women for abortions are the same that OPPOSE comprehensive sex ed and affordable health care), this is legislation that everyone KNOWS will disproportionally affect poor and minority women, and will only result in making abortions more unsafe, not prevent them - one could reasonably argue it's the whole POINT of this, the moral / religious virtue signalling aside. does that not matter? even if we went with the most generous possible framing and called it "well meaning" - shouldn't the predictable outcome matter for our support or opposition to specific legislation?