The fact that all but the most conservative of jackasses allow an exception to their anti-abortion stance reveals the real motives behind it. But, to get there, let’s work through the standard exceptions to the anti-choice position:

Medical necessity – When a mother’s health is a severe risk by a pregnancy and the fetus isn’t viable outside the womb, then the options are to let both die or to save one. Since the mother is the only one that can be saved, then it’s an easy choice to make, unless you’re completely nuts.

Incest – For the sake of clarity, we have to exclude forced incest and only look at the consenual variety. Since it increases the risk of birth defects and other genetic disorders, then it puts the potential child at risk of a really shitty life. However, if an ultrasound or genetic test found any defects, then the proponents of this exception would logically have to allow for aborting the defective soon to be progeny conceived by non-relatives, by those same people don’t want genetic tests or to allow people to abort a fetus that’s been found to have severe birth defects. Of course we’re talking about people who don’t follow logic.

Rape – As far as the fetus goes, the only difference is that it’s not the potential mother’s fault. It shows that they don’t care about fetal rights, they just want to slut shame women who engage in consensual non-procreative sex, or at least were trying to. Of course the exception does show that they aren’t asinine enough to require women to spend the rest of their lives with a living, breathing reminder of a very traumatic experience.

When they claim their concerned with fetal rights, they’re lying. All they want to do is shame women. I’m just curious as to why.