In alt.home.repair, on Mon, 9 Sep 2019 09:00:53 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Monday, September 9, 2019 at 11:28:40 AM UTC-4, micky wrote:
I hate to bring up a subject loaded with landmines, but alas, I can't
think of who else to ask.

A popular position on abortion is that there should be an exception for
rape and incest.

I certainly understand an exception for rape. The girl or woman didn't
do anything to cause the pregnancy and who wants to give birth to the
child of a rapist.


I don't understand the exception for rape. The unborn baby did nothing
wrong and if you believe abortion is wrong, that it's taking a human life,
then how the hell do you sanction murder because a woman doesn't want to
give birth to the child of a rapist?




OTOH, who wants to give up for adoption one's own
child, even if the father was a rapist.

Well, obviously someone who doesn't want to keep the child fathered
by the rapist. Seems turning the baby over for adoption is humane
and preferable to killing it.





And is what makes a man a
rapist even slightly genetic? If so, who wants to keep it or even give
it away?

Maybe you should figure this out first? AFAIK, no one has shown any
such genetic trait.





But why is an exception for incest so popular?

Amazing that you see no issue with an exception for rape, but do with

As usual, you jump to conclusions. I didn't say I had no issue with it.
I said I understood it. And then I explained it. While one might not
think that the reason is adequate, a normal person ought to be able to
see that it's a reason.

Replies to your remarks at the top are just as obvious.


incest. Previously you asked, why would anyone want to have a child
who was fathered by a rapist, but you think there is no similar issue
with having a child fathered by your father?

You didn't read my post very carefully or you would have seen the
difference.