Abortion

Raped or not raped - if a woman faces an unwanted pregnancy - she can exercise her choice to abort, under the current law. The unwanted pregnancy isn't judged as being "legitimate" or not.

Not sure why the hang up with the terms illegitimate and legitimate?
 
The word - as you pulled from your dictionary - is applied to rape.

Not pregnancy.

Pregnancy is not "illegal" and not "not authorized by the law".

This has been pointed out several times.
No that is not correct. I properly identified the rape as the illegal act, but I did project the consequences of this illegal act onto the resulting pregnancy, not as being illegal in and of itself but nevertheless consequential to the violence inflicted on the mother who endured the illegal act which caused the pregnancy.

Why should the mother be held responsible for something which was imposed on her by illegal means. Getting pregnant from rape is not an act of will and therefore cannot be illegal in and of itself. The rape is an illegal act and the victim cannot be made responsible for the results.

The pregnancy was not an act of Free Will by the rape victim, she is not responsible for the pregnancy and should not have to carry the burden of bringing the pregnancy to term and being responsible for the child fo the next 18 years. That is extreme insult upon injury. In this case the pregnancy is an injury not a blessing.
 
You are now arguing with the dictionary, not me....:)
I gave you a legitimate definition of the word.
A legitimate definition, you say? By which you mean what? That your definition is authorised by law? Or could it be that you, too, recognise and use another meaning of the word "legitimate"?

My dictionary, by the way, has this:
illegitimate (a.):
1. Contrary to or forbidden by law.
2. Of marriages and offspring: not recognised by law.

It also explicitly mentions "illegitimate child", describing it as "a child with parents that are not married to each other".

I don't know why you want to insist on me using another word when the definition I gave is quite adequate for its intended purpose.
I haven't insisted on anything. You, on the other hand, seem to be quite insistent on this matter, for some reason I haven't yet worked out.
 
No that is not correct. I properly identified the rape as the illegal act, but I did project the consequences of this illegal act onto the resulting pregnancy, not as being illegal in and of itself but nevertheless consequential to the violence inflicted on the mother who endured the illegal act which caused the pregnancy.

Why should the mother be held responsible for something which was imposed on her by illegal means. Getting pregnant from rape is not an act of will and therefore cannot be illegal in and of itself. The rape is an illegal act and the victim cannot be made responsible for the results.

The pregnancy was not an act of Free Will by the rape victim, she is not responsible for the pregnancy and should not have to carry the burden of bringing the pregnancy to term and being responsible for the child fo the next 18 years. That is extreme insult upon injury. In this case the pregnancy is an injury not a blessing.
It's a pity you didn't simply say this 22 posts ago - when asked several times for clarification on the misused word.
Yet, here we are, your peculiar use of a word costing 22 posts.
This happens so many times it's no longer a mistake.
 
1. Contrary to or forbidden by law.
Right, anything else you want to add to this fundamental generic definition?
2. Of marriages and offspring: not recognised by law.
Right, you want to place this specific definition in a higher hierarchy than "contrary to or forbidden by law"?

Tell your dictionary people that they are wrong. Don't accuse me of using the definitions incorrectly when clearly I am NOT!
 
Write4U:

No that is not correct. I properly identified the rape as the illegal act, but I did project the consequences of this illegal act onto the resulting pregnancy...
Nobody describes pregnancy as legitimate or illegitimate, not in the legal sense that you want to use that term. Pregnancies are not authorised by law - at least in the US. Women don't have to apply for pregnancy permits or for legal recognition that their pregnancy is authorised.

Why should the mother be held responsible for something which was imposed on her by illegal means. Getting pregnant from rape is not an act of will and therefore cannot be illegal in and of itself. The rape is an illegal act and the victim cannot be made responsible for the results.
Who has advocated holding mothers responsible for being raped? What are you talking about?
It is not a crime anywhere that I know of to get pregnant by being raped. It is a crime to rape somebody. It's not a crime to be a rape victim. Really, this is getting bizarre.

Your last sentence here suggests that what you really want to say is that women who have been raped cannot be legally responsible for children who are conceived as a result of the rape. But they can be and are held responsible. If a woman bears a child following a rape, she doesn't cease to have maternal obligations to that child on the grounds that she was raped. If you want to fixate on the law as it stands, that's where it stands. Mothers are responsible for their children, legally - even if those children were conceived as a result of a rape.

The pregnancy was not an act of Free Will by the rape victim, she is not responsible for the pregnancy and should not have to carry the burden of bringing the pregnancy to term and being responsible for the child fo the next 18 years.
Now that is a different matter. Certainly I agree with you that a rape victim should not be legally compelled to bring a pregnancy to term. I also note that the explicit, intended, effect of a number of recently-introduced laws in various US states is to so compel women. In Alabama, for example, legislators explicitly voted down a proposed amendment to their new law that would have allowed a rape victim to obtain a legal abortion.

Another proposed amendment to some of these laws was that if the state requires rape victims to birth these unwanted babies, then the state should pay for the care and upkeep of these children after birth, at least for several years. That amendment was also explicitly voted down by the legislators, which exposes the lie of their supposed care for the welfare and rights of children. Babies are precious and sacred, but not if the state has to fund their care, apparently.
 
Raped or not raped - if a woman faces an unwanted pregnancy - she can exercise her choice to abort, under the current law. The unwanted pregnancy isn't judged as being "legitimate" or not.
I'm sure the rape victim mother will not be so lenient. I suspect the rape victim will not consider the pregnancy as legitimate. It was not only unintentional and unwanted, but the result of an illegal and violent act by the rapist. And clearly the rapist is mentally unstable which might be due to a genetic defect being passed on to the fetus. And as I understand it from common law it is the female's right to refuse forcible pregnancy and a right to defend against such threats.
But, here comes the kicker, if she is unable to resist the attack, the rape magically changes to mere physical participation and responsibility for any direct consequences lies with the female.

But if she is unable to resist the force, she cannot be held responsible by any civilized standard. Why then deprive her of all rights in the decision making process. The person has become a "vessel", a human breeding machine.

That's what they do in Muslim countries. Make women wear burkas, lest the female form is too provocative for men to resist their basest inclinations. For real!
_83706049_3_burka_290-1.gif


Not sure why the hang up with the terms illegitimate and legitimate?
I wonder about that myself.

After consulting the dictionary to make sure that I use a term in the proper context, I am often called on the "misuse of common terminology" by people who do not even bother to look up in what context I am using the term. It's becoming a pain in the neck.
 
Last edited:
And from the latest
It's a pity you didn't simply say this 22 posts ago - when asked several times for clarification on the misused word. Yet, here we are, your peculiar use of a word costing 22 posts.
It's a pity you didn't bother to look it up in the dictionary. And I did several times explain the context and provided dictionary definition which you conveniently ignored. And you are still accusing ME?
This happens so many times it's no longer a mistake.
Oh yes, it does and seldom is it my fault. That is because I seldom misuse terms which are offered in context. But it is you who is constantly on my case because you are too lazy to check the dictionary and see the definition in black and white, before you accuse my of being "incorrect".

Even now you still persist in calling me out for "misusing the word". Shame on you. Read the fucking dictionary (or read post #123), instead of falsely accusing me of using a incorrect term!

It is your objections which are the obstacle to a free flowing discussion. Don't put this on me.
 
None of which has anything to do with my question, of course, so I will repeat it. Do you think that rape is the same as abortion?
What? Do you suspect I don't know the difference? Do you want definitions? Gimme a break.
 
You did.
You applied it to pregnancy.
No I did not. I said the pregnancy is the direct result of illegitimate, unlawful, illicit, against the law, criminal, lawbreaking, actionable, felonious RAPE. Take your pick.
 
Last edited:
What? Do you suspect I don't know the difference?
From your postings, I have no idea. It sounds like you use words differently than most people.
I'm sure the rape victim mother will not be so lenient. I suspect the rape victim will not consider the pregnancy as legitimate.
Nor will you. But no one cares whether you, or the rape victim's mother, thinks of whether it is "legitimate" or "illegitimate." The only person's opinion that matters is the opinion of the woman who is pregnant. And it only matters because she decides what happens with her own body, not if it's "legitimate" or not.
And as I understand it from common law it is the female's right to refuse forcible pregnancy and a right to defend against such threats.
There is no such law. She has a right to refuse sex, refuse medical procedures and has a right to use birth control. There is no legal definition of "forcible pregnancy" or "legitimate pregnancy."
But, here comes the kicker, if she is unable to resist the attack, the rape magically changes to mere physical participation and responsibility for any direct consequences lies with the female.
Nope. I am beginning to think you have no idea what you are talking about.
That's what they do in Muslim countries. Make women wear burkas, lest the female form is too provocative for men to resist their basest inclinations.
Just like Hitler!
 
Last edited:
W4U said,
I'm sure the rape victim mother will not be so lenient. I suspect the rape victim will not consider the pregnancy as legitimate.
But no one cares whether you, or the rape victim's mother
Sorry, that was a poorly constructed sentence. I meant to say the rape victim (the pregnant mother) would not see her pregnancy as legitimate, and that does count, IMO.

(note; the sentence reads the "rape victim mother", not the "rape victim's mother")
 
Last edited:
From your postings, I have no idea. It sounds like you use words differently than most people.
They are in the dictionary. I can't help it if people do not study the dictionary like I do. I know my limitations, that's why I consult the dictionary often. Shame not everybody tries to expand their vocabulary. Don't blame me for your ignorance.
There is no such law. She has a right to refuse sex, refuse medical procedures and has a right to use birth control. There is no legal definition of "forcible pregnancy" or "legitimate pregnancy."
I thought we were talking about rape, a forcible act.
Nope. I am beginning to think you have no idea what you are talking about.
Think harder.
W4U said,
That's what they do in Muslim countries. Make women wear burkas, lest the female form is too provocative for men to resist their basest inclinations.
Just like Hitler!
Wow, now that's a mental leap I cannot follow. Does that have anything to do with pregnancy resulting from rape?
 
They are in the dictionary. I can't help it if people do not study the dictionary like I do.
I do. Illegitimate, as applied to childbearing, means a child born to a couple who are not married. From Merriam Webster:
========
illegitimate
adjective
il·le·git·i·mate | \ ˌi-li-ˈji-tə-mət \
Definition of illegitimate

1: not recognized as lawful offspring specifically : born of parents not married to each other
=========
That's what the word means as applied to childbearing.
I know my limitations, that's why I consult the dictionary often.
Perhaps consulting it just a _tad_ more often would help you, then.
Wow, now that's a mental leap I cannot follow. Does that have anything to do with pregnancy resulting from rape?
Nope. Do burqas?
 
I do. Illegitimate, as applied to childbearing, means a child born to a couple who are not married. From Merriam Webster:
========
illegitimate
adjective
il·le·git·i·mate | \ ˌi-li-ˈji-tə-mət \
Definition of illegitimate

1: not recognized as lawful offspring specifically : born of parents not married to each other
=========
That's what the word means as applied to childbearing.
Interesting move of the goal posts. Your original quote read as follows;
billvon said,
My dictionary, by the way, has this:
illegitimate (a.):
1. Contrary to or forbidden by law.
2. Of marriages and offspring: not recognised by law.
So you just dropped the first "generic" definition, in favor of the second definition as it applies to pregnancy. But I still prefer the first definition as it applies to law.
illegitimate (a.):
1. Contrary to or forbidden by law.
synonyms; unlawful, illicit, against the law, criminal, lawbreaking, actionable, felonious RAPE.
That's what the word means as applied to law and rape.
Perhaps consulting it just a _tad_ more often would help you, then.
Perhaps you might take your own advice.
Nope. Do burqas?
They most certainly do. They are design to keep the womans body hidden, so that the woman will not pose an undue temptation to the Muslim male.
For many men and women, the burqa, the niqab, or any clothing that covers the whole female body including the face, is a powerful symbol of the oppression and subjugation of Muslim women. It is an obvious reminder of how the Taliban, who required women to wear the burqa, systematically abused the fundamental rights and freedoms of Afghan women, leaving them with the lowest life expectancy in the region and highest rates of maternal death.
https://www.hrw.org/news/2009/07/02/beyond-burqa#

It is an indictment of male mental and moral weakness, but it punishes the woman by dressing her in a black tent in 100 F heat as a solution to male base desires.
The burqa and other types of face veils have been attested since pre-Islamic times, in particular among Pashtun and Arab women. Face veiling has not been regarded as a religious requirement by most Islamic scholars, past or present. However, some scholars, especially those belonging to the Salafi movement, view it as obligatory for women in the presence of non-related (mahram) males. Women may wear the burqa for a number of reasons, including compulsion, as was the case in Afghanistan during Taliban rule.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burqa

Interestingly, some Muslim countries have more liberal abortion laws than some of our southern states
Muslim scholars have held that the child of rape is a legitimate child and thus it would be sinful to kill this child. Scholars permit its abortion only if the fetus is less than four months old, or if it endangers the life of its mother
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_Islamic_law
 
Last edited:
Perhaps you might take your own advice. They most certainly do.
You are making less and less sense. I have no idea what your point is, why you are arguing or why you are making up your own silly definitions. So I will let you continue it by yourself. Have a good day!
 
For many men and women, the burqa, the niqab, or any clothing that covers the whole female body including the face, is a powerful symbol of the oppression and subjugation of Muslim women.
Not for that many Muslim men and women, though.
 
Not for that many Muslim men and women, though.
May well be. I'm just quoting. I know the Taliban subjugate their women. They even have a special "morality" police force which patrols the streets to enforce "modesty" in women.

A common instant punishment for showing an ankle might well caning the ankles and feet of the "offender"
 
Back
Top