It seems to me that whether you became pregnant by choice or not would not actually matter from a moral perspective. The principles of whether the child could be afforded a satisfying life (or whatever your criterion for choice) remain unaffected, no?
In the case of rape, it's not about morality. It's about whether I could bear the reminder. I will point out that it's highly unlikely at any rate. I use birth control regardless of my sexual activity, and even so, I'd take the morning after pill.
May I ask you to explain why you might consider it in both situations?
Certainly.
In the case of disability, it's rather complex, but the nutshell is that I couldn't bear to inflict such suffering on my child when I could prevent it. My religious beliefs come into play in that I believe the "soul" would go on to another, presumably better life.
You might ask why I wouldn't just give the child up for adoption, and the answer is that I believe abortion to be morally superior in disability cases. Mostly because it prevents unnecessary suffering for the child, but there are also social factors at play. As mentioned upthread, there's no shortage of unwanted children in the world. The wait lists for adoption are because people want perfectly healthy (usually white) newborns. An infant with a major disability would not be in such high demand, and that only leads to more suffering.
As for adoption with a rape case, it's much less clear. As I said to MSizer, the morality takes a backseat to my own emotional capacity. I honestly don't know if I could love a child of rape, and I think I would be at war with myself. If I didn't love it (maybe even if I did), the pregnancy itself would mostly likely be a 9-month extension of the violation, and I don't know that I could handle that. If I did love it, could I love it enough to raise it fairly? Because I know I couldn't handle an adoption. I'm not saying it's right, but it might be necessary, for
me.
BTW, you're doing a great job keeping such a hot topic civil. Frubals.