Is abortion ever morally right?

[kch86]

In my mind, it’s just not that simple; the woman’s life is irrevocably changed…any chance of returning some sort of normalcy is not made possible with the addition of an unexpected child.

But an abortion done directly after conception would remove 9 months of pregnancy the mother would otherwise be forced to endure, in addition to her rape.

You are absolutely right that it is unfair for a victim of rape to have to suffer through 9 months of a pregnancy she does not want.

It is, however, a greater injustice to kill the innocent child that was conceived in her womb.

As you can see, both options, abortion or carrying the pregnancy to term, entail some sort of injustice. Many of us are more likely to empathise with the mother because she is an adult with well-developed mental faculties as opposed to the child. Both mother and child, however, are human beings and it is gravely wrong to kill either one of them.

So it is unfair that she should have to carry the pregnancy to term. It’s not her fault, and it’s not a problem with God’s law, but it is the fault and consequence of the actions of the rapist, who will have to suffer just punishment for his crime. While abortion may indeed alleviate the burden of pregnancy, it does nothing to reverse the rape that happened originally.

Killing an innocent child and potentially depriving him or her of decades of life for the sake of reducing a temporary burden, no matter how great, can never be right.

True morality is independent of circumstances. There will always be hard cases, however, and man will always be able to think of situations that might tempt him into doing the wrong thing. And that is because as humans, we are subject to Original Sin, and can easily be blinded from seeing the true horror of an act and thus attempt to rationalise it away because of a difficult situation.

It is an easy trap to fall into, and we all do it from time to time, but by letting ourselves be blinded and consciously rationalising certain acts based on circumstances, we break down the whole edifice of morality and turn right and wrong into nothing but mere opinion.

 

[JRKH]

Originally Posted by JRKH
Speaking to cases such as these…One might be able to say that abortion is morally justifiable if one can show that the baby committed a crime worthy of capital punishment…
Otherwise…Why is the innocent child being killed for the crime of another???

As already pointed out, the woman’s life has already been irrevocably changed by the fact of the crime. An abortion will not allow for, “any chance of returning some sort of normalcy” either.
Women who are victims of such crimes need counseling. If there is a pregnancy attached to the crime then that means the counselor has more work to do but does not change the fact that counseling, Love, and tender care are needed.

Now having said that…Let me point out that you did not answer my question.
In a nutshell it is this.
What crime has the Child committed that is worthy of Capital Punishment??

The obvious answer is none - and if the child is innocent than how can there be any justification for killing the child???

You say above, “In my mind, it’s just not that simple”, yet - it really IS that simple, when you recognize that the child in the womb is a person. It is not a “consequence”. It is not an “appendage”. It is not a “disease”. It is a “person”.

Once you wrap your head around this fact - that we are talking about a person here - a baby - A Human being - then it really DOES become that simple.

In case three, you all convinced me the best idea would be to attempt to save the mother and child, rather than make it an either/or scenario.

Glad we could help on this one.

Though just citing a wikipedia resource, roughly 50 million “legal” abortions have been carried out in the US since 1973…it seems to me people only feel the trauma of the abortion if it’s during the trimester…done early enough, the trauma seems to evaporate…if it were more traumatic, more women, not just Catholics, would make it akin to the Holocaust.

It is a holocaust. There are over 4000 abortions performed daily in the US alone. How many of those do you think fit into the - Rape, incest, life of the mother - criteria you mention in your OP?
I agree though that far too many people simply don’t recognize it for what it truly is. that is why we need to educate others. The only way to reduce abortion is to change the minds of the public.

But an abortion done directly after conception would remove 9 months of pregnancy the mother would otherwise be forced to endure, in addition to her rape.

The cost is too high. Why add murder to Rape?

Sorry for my odd verbage. Nevertheless, I’m seeing your point…how is a child, be 7, 8 or even 20 years old, whom she has chosen to give birth to, different from an unborn child? Well…she won’t have to endure the 9 months of pregnancy, as opposed to a child that is already born and is physically separate from her.

How is a 2 month old separate from it’s mother?? How about a 2 year old or even a 10 year old?? This idea of geography makes no sense. The pregnant woman looks down at her “belly”, or in a mirror and sees the result of the trauma. The mother of the two month old looks down into her arms and sees the results of the trauma as she cradles the child, the mother with the 10 year old looks across the table and sees the result of the trauma…
Yet - in the case of a child two months BEFORE birth you advocate for killing, while the child two months AFTER birth you would never consent to kill…Do you see the inconsistency here??

And perhaps deny the more sadistic rapist some sense of satisfaction from permanently altering her life beyond the rape experience itself.

But at what cost?? The Life of an innocent child???

THINK about what you are advocating. I know you are trying to be compassionate. But you are not considering ALL of the people involved. Th eChild in the womb is a Human Being

A mother being forced into pregnancy by a rapist can be seen as a form of slavery though…from the whims of a rapist, a sin inflicted on her unfairly dominates her life.

But it does remove a lifestyle she never asked for…

And that she can easily dispose of through the adoption process.

I am recognizing the fetus as a human being.

If you recognize the fetus as a human being then…How can you advocate the murder of an innocent human being under any circumstance???

Once again, thank you all for replying. I hate coming up with these counters, but my doubts keep raising its ugly head…

That’s OK. You haven’t really presented anything new…

I would just ask you to not over complicate the matter. If, as you say, you recognize the fetus as human, then the simple question I ask above (in different forms) requires an honest answer - not to me, but in your own mind…

What Crime has the Child committed that warrants the death penalty???

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

You are absolutely right that it is unfair for a victim of rape to have to suffer through 9 months of a pregnancy she does not want.

It is, however, a greater injustice to kill the innocent child that was conceived in her womb.

As you can see, both options, abortion or carrying the pregnancy to term, entail some sort of injustice. Many of us are more likely to empathise with the mother because she is an adult with well-developed mental faculties as opposed to the child. Both mother and child, however, are human beings and it is gravely wrong to kill either one of them.

So it is unfair that she should have to carry the pregnancy to term. It’s not her fault, and it’s not a problem with God’s law, but it is the fault and consequence of the actions of the rapist, who will have to suffer just punishment for his crime. While abortion may indeed alleviate the burden of pregnancy, it does nothing to reverse the rape that happened originally.

Killing an innocent child and potentially depriving him or her of decades of life for the sake of reducing a temporary burden, no matter how great, can never be right.

True morality is independent of circumstances. There will always be hard cases, however, and man will always be able to think of situations that might tempt him into doing the wrong thing. And that is because as humans, we are subject to Original Sin, and can easily be blinded from seeing the true horror of an act and thus attempt to rationalise it away because of a difficult situation.

It is an easy trap to fall into, and we all do it from time to time, but by letting ourselves be blinded and consciously rationalising certain acts based on circumstances, we break down the whole edifice of morality and turn right and wrong into nothing but mere opinion.

Great Post

Peace
James

 

[rmills1]

Speaking to cases such as these…One might be able to say that abortion is morally justifiable if one can show that the baby committed a crime worthy of capital punishment…
Otherwise…Why is the innocent child being killed for the crime of another???
…
Peace
James

Your comment is false. The Church speaks out against the death penalty/capital punishment

Taking another persons life is only morally acceptable in cases of self defense against a violent crime, where your life, or those you are responsible for, is at stake.

All instances of abortion are morally and objectively wrong.

 

[JRKH]

Your comment is false. The Church speaks out against the death penalty/capital punishment

Taking another persons life is only morally acceptable in cases of self defense against a violent crime, where your life, or those you are responsible for, is at stake.

All instances of abortion are morally and objectively wrong.

Two quick comments. Yes the Church does speak out against the death penalty but she does not absolutely forbid it as a last resort.

My comment to the OP was not intended to promote church teaching on Capital punishment, but rather is speaking to what the questioner(who may not be Catholic) might think of as moral. It is intended to make them think the matter through for themselves.
Regardless of a person’s faith, or lack of faith, and whether they favor or oppose the death penalty, NO ONE advocates the death of an innocent for the crime of another.
Yet - this is what occurs when a child, conceived through rape is aborted.

So - when a person (likely not Catholic) asks me about the circumstance of abortion for a rape victim…This is my question back to them…
“What crime has the child committed that is worthy of capital punishment?”

Peace
James

 

[kch86]

Your comment is false. The Church speaks out against the death penalty/capital punishment

Taking another persons life is only morally acceptable in cases of self defense against a violent crime, where your life, or those you are responsible for, is at stake.

All instances of abortion are morally and objectively wrong.

Not to derail the thread, but I believe that blessed Pope John Paul II stated something to the effect that in today’s age, capital punishment is no longer necessary.

I personally agree with that stance and believe that there are better ways of dealing with criminals than the death penalty. However, the Church has not declared capital punishment to be wrong, and as far as I am aware, it is possible for a loyal and orthodox Catholic to be in favour of capital punishment.

 

[JRKH]

Not to derail the thread, but I believe that blessed Pope John Paul II stated something to the effect that in today’s age, capital punishment is no longer necessary.

I personally agree with that stance and believe that there are better ways of dealing with criminals than the death penalty. However, the Church has not declared capital punishment to be wrong, and as far as I am aware, it is possible for a loyal and orthodox Catholic to be in favor of capital punishment.

The Catechism states this:
2267 Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.

If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.

Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity “are very rare, if not practically nonexistent.”

So we can see that the matter is not a simple one. Yes the Church allows for the possibility - but - only in the narrowest of circumstances…A loyal and orthodox Catholic CAN favor Capital punishment - but it needs to be within these very narrowly defined boundaries…

Peace
James

 

[Castello]

But it does remove a lifestyle she never asked for…

.

If somehow we are guaranteed the lifestyle we ask for, I DEMAND a refund!

I am certainly not living the lifestyle I asked for and I do not know any person who is. To kill someone because they hurt my lifestyle is the most selfish reason of all to kill.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

Though just citing a wikipedia resource, roughly 50 million “legal” abortions have been carried out in the US since 1973…it seems to me people only feel the trauma of the abortion if it’s during the trimester…done early enough, the trauma seems to evaporate…if it were more traumatic, more women, not just Catholics, would make it akin to the Holocaust.

But an abortion done directly after conception would remove 9 months of pregnancy the mother would otherwise be forced to endure, in addition to her rape.

.

Have you ever known or spoken to a woman who has had an abortion? It doesn’t matter when the abortion is performed, the woman KNOWS on a cellular level that a baby, that was created within her body and that was being grown and nourished BY her body, has been ripped out of place. This is physiological, psychological and spiritual knowledge. It is ALWAYS traumatic. The culture of death says to her, “Nothing has happened, and you will be relieved.” So where does she go with her grief? How does she then argue with everyone around her who is celebrating this murder? There is nowhere for her to turn. She cannot talk about it, she cannot grieve about it, she is cut off from support. There is no support.

Women who have been raped, and then had an abortion, have said without exception that the abortion was BY FAR the more traumatic experience. One account I read recently stated that the woman knew “the rapist had only taken a few minutes of my life, but I had taken my baby’s ENTIRE LIFE. Who was the worse criminal?”

Abortion ALWAYS hurts women. It kills a baby, and destroys a woman. It is wrong, gravely sinful, and women have been and are lied to every. single. day.

 

[AHapka]

How is a 2 month old separate from it’s mother?? How about a 2 year old or even a 10 year old?? This idea of geography makes no sense. The pregnant woman looks down at her “belly”, or in a mirror and sees the result of the trauma. The mother of the two month old looks down into her arms and sees the results of the trauma as she cradles the child, the mother with the 10 year old looks across the table and sees the result of the trauma…
Yet - in the case of a child two months BEFORE birth you advocate for killing, while the child two months AFTER birth you would never consent to kill…Do you see the inconsistency here??

As a further point to the discussion. I am the youngest of four kids. I am 38. I AM STILL THE BABY.

Moms see us as babies (in a certain fashion) throughout their whole lives…there is no changing that.

The only discussion is if killing us will make them feel better or not.

 

[sw85]

Well…I don’t think God telling a man to rape a woman would ever be considered a good, even in a hypothetical scenario to preserve the human species from extinction. But if God is goodness, and all morals are truly objective, I doubt he’d ever ask that.

I don’t know that we’re talking about rape but abortion. There are plenty of examples of God telling someone to kill someone else.

Of course God is goodness, but morality reflects goodness only by reference to God. God ordained our natures such that murder is bad. But this means he can also override that nature with specific and binding commands.

 

[He_Man]

Judging from the statistics for casual abortions and birth control in the US, not many seem to be traumatized.

Say what? jimandellen.org/gmuhome/abortion.html

And what if regret or mental issues occur 10+ years later. Statistics become harder and harder to quantify as time goes on.

And they are wholly irrelevant insofar as Church teaching is concerned. Debating what ifs when absolute pronouncements have been made is a futile exercise in pride, frankly.

 

[JRKH]

Say what? jimandellen.org/gmuhome/abortion.html

And what if regret or mental issues occur 10+ years later. Statistics become harder and harder to quantify as time goes on.

And they are wholly irrelevant insofar as Church teaching is concerned. Debating what ifs when absolute pronouncements have been made is a futile exercise in pride, frankly.

re: The Bolded.
I don’t necessarily agree with this. Going through some of the “what-if’s” can help a person to better understand and then to better explain to others.

Personally I come from the position of humbly accepting the teaching but asking questions (what ifs) to gain understanding.

Peace
James

 

[teachccd]

You would rather be killed than to know that you were conceived against your mother’s will. Well I happen to personally know two people who were conceived through a rape and neither one agrees with you. To them, unlike yourself, this is not hypothetical but a fact of life; their life. You are really goin out on a limb when you speak for who can and cannot live and what constitutes “valid” methods of conception. God creates a soul in every human being and He does not discriminate against how one was conceived.

NO, abortion is NEVER morally right and we can argue this point until the cows come home but abortion is murder and that is NEVER morally right. Now, carry on with this thread and contiune to rationalize your viewpoints. The concise and succinct answer to your initial post is NO…period.

 

[He_Man]

re: The Bolded.
I don’t necessarily agree with this. Going through some of the “what-if’s” can help a person to better understand and then to better explain to others.

Personally I come from the position of humbly accepting the teaching but asking questions (what ifs) to gain understanding.

Peace
James

Try to understand the “what ifs” is different than asking if something infallible is right or not. Moot point.

If the effort is to agree, but better understand, go for it.

 

[minion]

Thank you all again for your responses. I don’t think I’ve said too much I haven’t said before, but here goes.

You are absolutely right that it is unfair for a victim of rape to have to suffer through 9 months of a pregnancy she does not want.

It is, however, a greater injustice to kill the innocent child that was conceived in her womb.

As you can see, both options, abortion or carrying the pregnancy to term, entail some sort of injustice. Many of us are more likely to empathise with the mother because she is an adult with well-developed mental faculties as opposed to the child. Both mother and child, however, are human beings and it is gravely wrong to kill either one of them.

So it is unfair that she should have to carry the pregnancy to term. It’s not her fault, and it’s not a problem with God’s law, but it is the fault and consequence of the actions of the rapist, who will have to suffer just punishment for his crime. While abortion may indeed alleviate the burden of pregnancy, it does nothing to reverse the rape that happened originally.

Killing an innocent child and potentially depriving him or her of decades of life for the sake of reducing a temporary burden, no matter how great, can never be right.

I guess it ultimately comes to this point, and I’m still not sure I can agree. Right of the mother reclaim some semblance of her life, or the right of the child to live, sacrificing the mother’s way of life?

True morality is independent of circumstances. There will always be hard cases, however, and man will always be able to think of situations that might tempt him into doing the wrong thing. And that is because as humans, we are subject to Original Sin, and can easily be blinded from seeing the true horror of an act and thus attempt to rationalise it away because of a difficult situation.

It is an easy trap to fall into, and we all do it from time to time, but by letting ourselves be blinded and consciously rationalising certain acts based on circumstances, we break down the whole edifice of morality and turn right and wrong into nothing but mere opinion.

I agree. But I’m simply not certain if abortion fits this though to the tee though…one way or another, the mother’s life is changed by pregnancy against her will, and forbidding her the option at all seems wrong to me as well.

Now having said that…Let me point out that you did not answer my question.
In a nutshell it is this.
What crime has the Child committed that is worthy of Capital Punishment??

The obvious answer is none - and if the child is innocent than how can there be any justification for killing the child???

Yes, the child committed no crime at all. But the child is living at the expense of the mother physically.

It is a holocaust. There are over 4000 abortions performed daily in the US alone. How many of those do you think fit into the - Rape, incest, life of the mother - criteria you mention in your OP?
I agree though that far too many people simply don’t recognize it for what it truly is. that is why we need to educate others. The only way to reduce abortion is to change the minds of the public.

Agreed in this respect. A child should not be killed because the parents were being irresponsible.

How is a 2 month old separate from it’s mother?? How about a 2 year old or even a 10 year old?? This idea of geography makes no sense. The pregnant woman looks down at her “belly”, or in a mirror and sees the result of the trauma. The mother of the two month old looks down into her arms and sees the results of the trauma as she cradles the child, the mother with the 10 year old looks across the table and sees the result of the trauma…
Yet - in the case of a child two months BEFORE birth you advocate for killing, while the child two months AFTER birth you would never consent to kill…Do you see the inconsistency here??

I see what you’re saying, but the baby is tethered in a physical way to the mother. The baby lives because the mother lives. If the mother dies, the baby likely dies as well.

And that she can easily dispose of through the adoption process.

Life in an orphanage seems pretty grim too, with no guarantee of adoption.

If somehow we are guaranteed the lifestyle we ask for, I DEMAND a refund!

I am certainly not living the lifestyle I asked for and I do not know any person who is. To kill someone because they hurt my lifestyle is the most selfish reason of all to kill.

However, an abortion does allow the mother to reclaim how she previously lived to some degree.

Have you ever known or spoken to a woman who has had an abortion? It doesn’t matter when the abortion is performed, the woman KNOWS on a cellular level that a baby, that was created within her body and that was being grown and nourished BY her body, has been ripped out of place. This is physiological, psychological and spiritual knowledge. It is ALWAYS traumatic.

Not everyone seems to feel the same guilt. Just a quick google search, but: rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2011/06/10/happy-abortioncatholic-womans-guiltfree-story

Horrible, awful article, but there you have it.

 

[Rocky24]

It is never ok to kill a baby just as it is never okay to kill another human being. In cases of incest and rape, their is no exception because that is still a human life in the womb of the mother. Nothing changes! If the woman were to abort the child, wouldn’t she be adding to her trauma and sorrow?

 

[minion]

cont.

Women who have been raped, and then had an abortion, have said without exception that the abortion was BY FAR the more traumatic experience. One account I read recently stated that the woman knew “the rapist had only taken a few minutes of my life, but I had taken my baby’s ENTIRE LIFE. Who was the worse criminal?”

Abortion ALWAYS hurts women. It kills a baby, and destroys a woman. It is wrong, gravely sinful, and women have been and are lied to every. single. day.

Is there a specific source or statistics you can cite to point me to this? I would be interested in reading it.

I don’t know that we’re talking about rape but abortion. There are plenty of examples of God telling someone to kill someone else.

Of course God is goodness, but morality reflects goodness only by reference to God. God ordained our natures such that murder is bad. But this means he can also override that nature with specific and binding commands.

Morality reflects goodness only be reference to God, true, but that’s because God is omniscient, and knows the ultimate circumstance of the killing he may command. If God commanded someone to commit rape, I would definitely question whether it’s really God. Even to preserve the human race from extinction, someone could justify the rape of women to “save the species” and then say the abortion is a sin, preventing the woman from any other recourse. What worth is life if the quality of living could only be preserved by constant sin?

An extreme, almost sci-fi hypothetical scenario, but the point stands…

Say what? jimandellen.org/gmuhome/abortion.html
And they are wholly irrelevant insofar as Church teaching is concerned. Debating what ifs when absolute pronouncements have been made is a futile exercise in pride, frankly.

Someone who doesn’t question their faith can easily fall into fanaticism. What is someone’s not raised Catholic, and raised with different values they never question?

You would rather be killed than to know that you were conceived against your mother’s will. Well I happen to personally know two people who were conceived through a rape and neither one agrees with you. To them, unlike yourself, this is not hypothetical but a fact of life; their life. You are really goin out on a limb when you speak for who can and cannot live and what constitutes “valid” methods of conception. God creates a soul in every human being and He does not discriminate against how one was conceived.

NO, abortion is NEVER morally right and we can argue this point until the cows come home but abortion is murder and that is NEVER morally right. Now, carry on with this thread and contiune to rationalize your viewpoints. The concise and succinct answer to your initial post is NO…period.

I can also reverse this, and say you are really going out on a limb to tell a mother she is obligated to give birth to a child she never wished for. If the answer was really that cut and dry, debating abortion wouldn’t really be an issue. No ever claims lying is good, adultery is good, stealing is good, etc., but those have been justified under certain circumstances. For example, a person lying to a Nazi SS officer that they have Jewish children hidden in his basement, or Robin Hood stealing from the wealthy because the King is taxing people to the point of poverty.

I don’t like rationalizing my viewpoints, but they are what I’m thinking. I don’t like the choices either way.

 

[JRKH]

Thank you all again for your responses. I don’t think I’ve said too much I haven’t said before, but here goes.

You are welcome. I think that we recognize that you are trying to work your way through this matter. I did too at one time. I’m confident that patience, prayer and reflection on God’s Will will eventually bring you to the correct understanding

I guess it ultimately comes to this point, and I’m still not sure I can agree. Right of the mother reclaim some semblance of her life, or the right of the child to live, sacrificing the mother’s way of life?

I agree. But I’m simply not certain if abortion fits this though to the tee though…one way or another, the mother’s life is changed by pregnancy against her will, and forbidding her the option at all seems wrong to me as well.

Yes, the child committed no crime at all. But the child is living at the expense of the mother physically.

I think that these statements contain the root of why you cannot get your head around the matter. And truthfully I don’t know if we can ever explain it in a “convincing manner”. It’s something that you simply have to internalize and come to recognize in your heart.

As we have already pointed out, the woman’s life is already irreparably changed by the rape - pregnancy or no pregnancy. That change will not go away if she has an abortion. True it will altar the timetable on her counseling by a few months but that is about all.
You want her to be able to reclaim some semblance of her life. So do we. But when and at what cost?? Is the few months of additional discomfort worth the life of the child?? Think about this carefully.
Carrying the child to term (with proper counseling) is a life affirming decision. It stems from Love - something that the rapist damaged and something the woman needs to reclaim and reestablish in her life. Love - God’s Love - Affirmation - right thinking - creation - caring for life - giving of ones self for another. All of these things are contained in a decision to carry the child to term and then give it up for adoption to a loving and caring family. Carrying the child to term can be part of the healing process for the woman - especially if she is getting counseling -which she will need in any case.
Aborting the child is NOT life affirming. It is the very opposite. It is not loving, it is hateful. It is revenge - revenge taken against an innocent child for something the child did not do. It is selfish. A willingness to kill yes murder an innocent child for the sake of a few months of the woman’s life.
A decision to abort contains in it Nothing that is useful for the woman to “reclaim her life” or her dignity. Killing the child will not make her hate the rapist less. It will not affirm her life. It does not support creation or bring anything positive out of the awful crime. It just adds another crime on top of the rape - and in this case it is a crime that the rape victim herself is guilty of.

No - I see nothing beneficial here for the rape victim in balancing “nine months of (life affirming) discomfort” vs the death of an innocent child.

Life in an orphanage seems pretty grim too, with no guarantee of adoption.

There are generally waiting lists for infants. It’s older children who are harder to place.

I don’t like rationalizing my viewpoints, but they are what I’m thinking. I don’t like the choices either way.

I understand. You have to work from where you are.
The fact that you, “don’t like the choices either way”, is healthy. Now all you have to do is simplify the matter as to what is the lesser “evil” of the two choices that you don’t like.
What is the lesser evil…sacrificing a few months to the giving of life? Or taking the life of another in order to save a few months discomfort?

Personally I see no alternative. the death of the child in the womb - the most innocent of all - is unconscionable.

Peace
James

 

[TheRealJuliane]

cont.

Is there a specific source or statistics you can cite to point me to this? I would be interested in reading it.

Yes.

theunchoice.com/pdf/FactSheets/HardCases.pdf

theunchoice.com/specialreports/sexualassault.htm