Bandorr said:
SuaveSocialist said:
It is certainly obvious, but there is a problem if that is one of the requirements as a legal route for the procedure. If all other acceptable reasons are unavailable for whatever reason (child poses no threat to the mother, mother can afford the procedure, etc), the system incentivizes false claims or accusations of rape. In cases of actual sexual assault, since the accused is innocent until proven guilty, the act may not even be accurately determined as rape until well after the child is born.
Therein lies the paradox. Actual rape victims do not get their procedures while non-victims do. For that reason (for this particular argument anyways), I believe that no such requirement should exist.
|
So you rather people that are raped be forced to keep the child? To have to carry for nine months that horrible disgusting fristening moment? Simply because others may game the system?
|
Quite the opposite. Because it would encourage people to game the system and systemic injustice be an unwanted by-product, I believe there should not be any legal requirement to undergo the procedure. It would be the only sure way to guarantee access to the procedure for those we both admit are rightly deserving.
