A moral question about rape

Ethics, Morality, and Sin

Moderator: Moderators

Athetotheist
Sage
Posts: 806
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 77 times

A moral question about rape

Post #1

Post by Athetotheist »

I'm not sure if this is quite the right subforum for this, but I'm taking a guess that it is.

Assault is a violent move against someone. Rape takes assault to another level because, in the case of rape, the assault continues even when the assailant is no longer present; the victim's body is still being invaded.

Question for moral debate:

Given that rape is a type of assault which continues even after the assailant leaves the scene, is someone who denies emergency contraception to the victim of a rape acting as an accessory to that rape?

Athetotheist
Sage
Posts: 806
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 77 times

Re: A moral question about rape

Post #31

Post by Athetotheist »

Miles wrote: Sat Nov 20, 2021 1:53 pm
Athetotheist wrote: Sat Nov 20, 2021 7:36 am [Replying to Miles in post #28]
That may be the party line, but the fact is, in the USA quite a few single income working-class families are supported quite nicely on that single income. My working-class income exists as just such an example.
Have you factored in various types of insurance? College tuition for kids?
For myself, yes. For others it would depend on the number of children and their ambitions (not all want college). As for insurance, that's too large a variable to factor in, maybe yes, maybe no.

Thing to remember is that not all working-class folk are only making a subsistence level incomes. A lot of us do quite nicely, making more than many in white-collar occupations.


.
A blue-collar job that hasn't been outsourced or automated? You are lucky indeed.

User avatar
Miles
Prodigy
Posts: 2780
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:19 pm
Has thanked: 172 times
Been thanked: 619 times

Re: A moral question about rape

Post #32

Post by Miles »

Athetotheist wrote: Sat Nov 20, 2021 5:37 pm
Miles wrote: Sat Nov 20, 2021 1:53 pm
Athetotheist wrote: Sat Nov 20, 2021 7:36 am [Replying to Miles in post #28]
That may be the party line, but the fact is, in the USA quite a few single income working-class families are supported quite nicely on that single income. My working-class income exists as just such an example.
Have you factored in various types of insurance? College tuition for kids?
For myself, yes. For others it would depend on the number of children and their ambitions (not all want college). As for insurance, that's too large a variable to factor in, maybe yes, maybe no.

Thing to remember is that not all working-class folk are only making a subsistence level incomes. A lot of us do quite nicely, making more than many in white-collar occupations.


.
A blue-collar job that hasn't been outsourced or automated? You are lucky indeed.
I consider it to have been a wise choice (I looked into it pretty thoroughly), rather than luck. The same is true of several of my friends who did the same with their occupations, and, like myself, have end up comfortably.




.
Last edited by Miles on Sat Nov 20, 2021 7:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Athetotheist
Sage
Posts: 806
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 77 times

Re: A moral question about rape

Post #33

Post by Athetotheist »

Miles wrote: Sat Nov 20, 2021 6:07 pm
Athetotheist wrote: Sat Nov 20, 2021 5:37 pm
Miles wrote: Sat Nov 20, 2021 1:53 pm
Athetotheist wrote: Sat Nov 20, 2021 7:36 am [Replying to Miles in post #28]
That may be the party line, but the fact is, in the USA quite a few single income working-class families are supported quite nicely on that single income. My working-class income exists as just such an example.
Have you factored in various types of insurance? College tuition for kids?
For myself, yes. For others it would depend on the number of children and their ambitions (not all want college). As for insurance, that's too large a variable to factor in, maybe yes, maybe no.

Thing to remember is that not all working-class folk are only making a subsistence level incomes. A lot of us do quite nicely, making more than many in white-collar occupations.


.
A blue-collar job that hasn't been outsourced or automated? You are lucky indeed.
I consider it to have been a wise choice (I looked into it pretty thoroughly), rather than luck. The same is true of several of my friends who did the same with their chosen occupations, and, like myself, have end up quite comfortably.




.
I assume you're not implying that those who have lost their livelihoods to downsizing and offshoring were just foolish and to blame for their own predicament. That would be a little bourgeois.

User avatar
Miles
Prodigy
Posts: 2780
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:19 pm
Has thanked: 172 times
Been thanked: 619 times

Re: A moral question about rape

Post #34

Post by Miles »

Athetotheist wrote: Sat Nov 20, 2021 7:58 pm
Miles wrote: Sat Nov 20, 2021 6:07 pm
Athetotheist wrote: Sat Nov 20, 2021 5:37 pm
Miles wrote: Sat Nov 20, 2021 1:53 pm
Athetotheist wrote: Sat Nov 20, 2021 7:36 am [Replying to Miles in post #28]
That may be the party line, but the fact is, in the USA quite a few single income working-class families are supported quite nicely on that single income. My working-class income exists as just such an example.
Have you factored in various types of insurance? College tuition for kids?
For myself, yes. For others it would depend on the number of children and their ambitions (not all want college). As for insurance, that's too large a variable to factor in, maybe yes, maybe no.

Thing to remember is that not all working-class folk are only making a subsistence level incomes. A lot of us do quite nicely, making more than many in white-collar occupations.


.
A blue-collar job that hasn't been outsourced or automated? You are lucky indeed.
I consider it to have been a wise choice (I looked into it pretty thoroughly), rather than luck. The same is true of several of my friends who did the same with their chosen occupations, and, like myself, have end up quite comfortably.




.
I assume you're not implying that those who have lost their livelihoods to downsizing and offshoring were just foolish and to blame for their own predicament. That would be a little bourgeois.
Not implying a thing.


.

User avatar
Purple Knight
Guru
Posts: 1638
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
Has thanked: 460 times
Been thanked: 267 times

Re: A moral question about rape

Post #35

Post by Purple Knight »

I'm replying to this in a thread more suited to my reply.
The Barbarian wrote: Fri Nov 19, 2021 9:33 amPretty much so. There are environments where parthengenesis is selected for, but they aren't common, and when the environment changes, such organisms are pretty well screwed. In general parthenogenic species of lizards live where conditions are marginal for lizards. For the obvious reason:


Science
Vol. 197, No. 4306
Animal Parthenogenesis: A new evolutionary-ecological model is needed.
Parthenogenesis can only evolve in areas devoid of the generating bisexual species, because such species would prevent newly formed unisexuals from establishing clones due either to hybridization or competition. Furthermore, the two unique features allowing parthenogenetic species to invade and occupy open habitats faster than bisexuals are (i) a double intrinsic rate of increase and (ii) the ability of one individual to establish a new colony.
This spells out pretty clearly the fact that in the wild, males are useless beyond being gene banks for females. In the wild, the female is the valuable one. The female can make more. When acts of god hit the species, it is the females that take it on the chin and save their kind, while all the males do is take up space.

This is in stark contrast to the safe, overpopulated world humans find themselves in. If we had 90% males, we would get the benefit of physically fitter individuals and not experience a cost, since there are already too many people.

The safer the world, the better males are for it, and the worse the conditions, the more females you want. Rats figured this out long before me, and pregnant female rats make more males in good times, and more females in lean ones.

So when you're looking for someone to blame for sexism, blame the people who made the world too safe, so much so that it has almost obsoleted the female's natural adaptation-set. They're the same ones who made Idiocracy come to pass. Humpty-Dumpty falls off a wall and no matter that no one else did, the collective flips its lid and demands that the wall be made safer. They may not seem related but these extreme safety reactionaries are more responsible for sexism than any patriarchy.

In any rational world, females would be just as valuable as males, if not more so. We happen to live in an irrational, idiocracy of the safety-obsessed, and we have come to live in a padded room, where it's everyone else's responsibility to save idiots from the consequences of their actions. This world can't last. But in this brief period, the bolder, stronger male has the clear advantage.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 9183
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 323 times
Been thanked: 812 times
Contact:

Re: A moral question about rape

Post #36

Post by William »

[Replying to Athetotheist in post #1]

It is an interesting question.

Some women chose to keep their babies even though the fetus came about through an act of rape.

Therefore, the OPQ is redundant, because the claim "since rape is a type of assault which continues even after the assailant leaves the scene", is not able to be established or otherwise made as "a given".

Clearly is it not a 'given'.

Athetotheist
Sage
Posts: 806
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 77 times

Re: A moral question about rape

Post #37

Post by Athetotheist »

William wrote: Thu Nov 25, 2021 10:27 am [Replying to Athetotheist in post #1]

It is an interesting question.

Some women chose to keep their babies even though the fetus came about through an act of rape.

Therefore, the OPQ is redundant, because the claim "since rape is a type of assault which continues even after the assailant leaves the scene", is not able to be established or otherwise made as "a given".

Clearly is it not a 'given'.
If someone puts you in restraints to torture you and you choose to remain even though you could break the restraints and escape, the continued abuse is still an assault. And if a woman chooses to take a pregnancy to term after a rape, the rape----and its consequences----are still an assault. It's made an assault by the assailant's action, regardless of the victim's reaction to it.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 9183
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 323 times
Been thanked: 812 times
Contact:

Re: A moral question about rape

Post #38

Post by William »

Athetotheist wrote: Thu Nov 25, 2021 1:34 pm
William wrote: Thu Nov 25, 2021 10:27 am [Replying to Athetotheist in post #1]

It is an interesting question.

Some women chose to keep their babies even though the fetus came about through an act of rape.

Therefore, the OPQ is redundant, because the claim "since rape is a type of assault which continues even after the assailant leaves the scene", is not able to be established or otherwise made as "a given".

Clearly is it not a 'given'.
If someone puts you in restraints to torture you and you choose to remain even though you could break the restraints and escape, the continued abuse is still an assault. And if a woman chooses to take a pregnancy to term after a rape, the rape----and its consequences----are still an assault. It's made an assault by the assailant's action, regardless of the victim's reaction to it.
You are thinking, and consequently arguing about this too narrowly.

The consequences of getting pregnant are the same whether the woman was raped or not. This is natural and there is no logical [or reasonable] cause to refer to a fetus as an assault, just because it was conceived through the act of rape.

Which was what I meant, when I wrote that some women chose to keep their babies even though the fetus came about through an act of rape.

Athetotheist
Sage
Posts: 806
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 77 times

Re: A moral question about rape

Post #39

Post by Athetotheist »

William wrote: Thu Nov 25, 2021 1:58 pm
Athetotheist wrote: Thu Nov 25, 2021 1:34 pm
William wrote: Thu Nov 25, 2021 10:27 am [Replying to Athetotheist in post #1]

It is an interesting question.

Some women chose to keep their babies even though the fetus came about through an act of rape.

Therefore, the OPQ is redundant, because the claim "since rape is a type of assault which continues even after the assailant leaves the scene", is not able to be established or otherwise made as "a given".

Clearly is it not a 'given'.
If someone puts you in restraints to torture you and you choose to remain even though you could break the restraints and escape, the continued abuse is still an assault. And if a woman chooses to take a pregnancy to term after a rape, the rape----and its consequences----are still an assault. It's made an assault by the assailant's action, regardless of the victim's reaction to it.
You are thinking, and consequently arguing about this too narrowly.

The consequences of getting pregnant are the same whether the woman was raped or not. This is natural and there is no logical [or reasonable] cause to refer to a fetus as an assault, just because it was conceived through the act of rape.

Which was what I meant, when I wrote that some women chose to keep their babies even though the fetus came about through an act of rape.
I wasn't referring to the fetus as an assault; I was referring to the forced impregnation as an assault.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 9183
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 323 times
Been thanked: 812 times
Contact:

Re: A moral question about rape

Post #40

Post by William »

Athetotheist wrote: Thu Nov 25, 2021 2:26 pm
William wrote: Thu Nov 25, 2021 1:58 pm
Athetotheist wrote: Thu Nov 25, 2021 1:34 pm
William wrote: Thu Nov 25, 2021 10:27 am [Replying to Athetotheist in post #1]

It is an interesting question.

Some women chose to keep their babies even though the fetus came about through an act of rape.

Therefore, the OPQ is redundant, because the claim "since rape is a type of assault which continues even after the assailant leaves the scene", is not able to be established or otherwise made as "a given".

Clearly is it not a 'given'.
If someone puts you in restraints to torture you and you choose to remain even though you could break the restraints and escape, the continued abuse is still an assault. And if a woman chooses to take a pregnancy to term after a rape, the rape----and its consequences----are still an assault. It's made an assault by the assailant's action, regardless of the victim's reaction to it.
You are thinking, and consequently arguing about this too narrowly.

The consequences of getting pregnant are the same whether the woman was raped or not. This is natural and there is no logical [or reasonable] cause to refer to a fetus as an assault, just because it was conceived through the act of rape.

Which was what I meant, when I wrote that some women chose to keep their babies even though the fetus came about through an act of rape.
I wasn't referring to the fetus as an assault; I was referring to the forced impregnation as an assault.
It looks to me that you were referring to the fetus, as you wrote;
the assault continues even when the assailant is no longer present; the victim's body is still being invaded.

Post Reply