An inconsistency came to light in a recent discussion on the abortion issue.  As some of you may know, I recently came out as pro-abortion (see collapsed article), but that doesn't mean I don't still enjoy pointing out the inconsistencies in the progressive position.  In this case my discussion partner was actually a conservative, but the thought he expressed is certainly one that many consider a "main stream" position.

Personally I don’t feel we can make the raped mother morally responsible for the child that results from the rape.

http://rapsheetblog.wordpress.com/2012/10/28/abortion-exceptions-and-consistent-philosophies/comment-page-1/#comment-201

I can't see many progressives disagreeing with that position.  The question now on the table is, if we agree that an exception should be made for rape, and I'm for abortions without restrictions, based on the fact that the woman had no choice in the matter, how does that support the notion that the rest of the nation should be responsible in any way for the product of an act of which they either had no knowledge or actively opposed?  Rape is rape and choice is choice, shouldn't the same rules apply to like situations?