ACLU and Planned Parenthood Contest Amendment

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: dgevert

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: dgevert
Where I come from, when a person is shown that his claim is wrong, he takes it back. To do so otherwise is dishonest. I've already proven Riprorin's signature to be wrong. He hasn't taken it back.

Come to your own conclusions. Apparently the moderators prefer that I don't help you with that.

Wasn't your post just deleted?

CsG

Integrity First, Service Before Self, Excellence in All We Do - USAF Core Values

God help USAF. Inability to follow the rules -- I bet you question direct orders from your superiors, too.

As for the OT, I just learned today that the US is one of only 6 countries in the world where women have unfettered access to abortion. I fail to see how a child can't get aspirin from the school nurse without a parent's consent, but they can have an abortion because in one out of a million it might be incest.

"We shouldn't put anyone in jail because someone might be innocent."

 

[bamacre]

I think CADsortaGUY and Rip have my vote in this matter. If the patient is under 18, parental consent needs to be given before a surgical procedure can be done. There does need to be something done in situations of incest, obviously, but this would be a very small percentage of the big picture here.

 

[slurmsmackenzie]

Originally posted by: bamacre
I think CADsortaGUY and Rip have my vote in this matter. If the patient is under 18, parental consent needs to be given before a surgical procedure can be done. There does need to be something done in situations of incest, obviously, but this would be a very small percentage of the big picture here.

hell, a 15 year old can't buy a mop off an infomercial without parental consent.....

anyways... unfortunately, it's not as easy what's best for the child. there are psychological factors involved. is this a stable individual? what is the nature of the pregnancy? is she gonna be back in 6 mos? having a child causes hormonal changes, not just being bummed out, kids. when the natural process is interrupted, i can see where this could affect a person psychologically. things like this aren't taken into consideration in "black or white" america. we can't speak for the nature of Id, so there will always be a side of the story we aren't considering.

rip.... you do tend to one-side things. sometimes, it makes it harder on us that are trying to defend what's right. other than those a holes in d.c., people are coming from somewhere and it feels right to them. you have to use caution when attacking people's fervernt stance. otherwise, your point loses it's luster and a flame fest ensues. you catch more flies with honey, bro.

 

[Bearcat14]

CsG[/quote]

IMHO, the problem here is that many people make judgements about abortion that they don't about other elective procedures, often ones that are not in the best interest of the child. If your daughter is 15 years old, having a kid could quite possibly wreck the rest of her life. But there are still parents who would forbid her from having an abortion, not because they think it's best for her, but because of their beliefs about abortion. They will be hurting their child by sticking by their beliefs.

Obviously the solution is for teenagers to engage in safe sex (or none at all), but many teenagers aren't smart enough to do that, and everyone makes plenty of mistakes as a teenager. I know I did, I'm sure most of you did as well. But parents are willing to sacrafice their kids for this particular mistake, even though there is a solution, simply because they don't agree with the (legal) solution.

I agree, parents should have to approve elective procedures for their kids, EXCEPT when having those elective procedures would be in the child's best interest and the parents still forbid it. Parents who aren't working in their child's best interests should not be given decision making authority. There is lots of case law to back this concept up, a parent does not have unlimited power over their child when they aren't acting in the kid's best interests.

As far as what the kid's best interests are, I think we can all agree that 15 year old girls should not be having children, correct?[/quote]

They will be hurting the child by sticking by their beliefs???? That is an incredible statement!

First of all, the child should have never gotten pregnant in the first place. Whatever happened to self-responsibility? I guess it's a good lesson to teach children that any mistake can be erased (including a pregnancy), so go ahead and have sex and don't worry about it. You can always abort! Equating "making mistakes while you're a teenager" with getting pregnant is off the chart ridiculous. Getting caught smoking is a teenage mistake. Getting pregnant is not the same.

Second, you're actually criticizing people for sticking by their beliefs, which I'm sure you would be severely offended by if anyone turned that around on you.

Finally, I guess you're insinuating that hurting the grandchild (or aborted child) is much more acceptable than harming the child (the mother). Or are we assuming an unborn child isn't living? Better to sacrifice your grandchild than child, I guess.

But I guess the most disturbing thing about this line of thought is that you are saying that the STATE (i.e. the courts) somehow has a much better grasp about what is good for your kids than the parents do. That, if nothing else, is more Orwellian than anything I've heard in a long time. This is why democrats keep losing elections.

 

[Train]

Originally posted by: gutharius

Originally posted by: nick1985

Originally posted by: gutharius

Originally posted by: Riprorin
ACLU and Planned Parenthood Contest Amendment

January 13, 2005 02:13 PM

The ACLU and Planned Parenthood want the courts to nullify the parental notification amendment passed by voters in November. The amendment requires females under the age of 18 to have parental approval before receiving an abortion. ACLU Legislative Councilman Larry Spalding says the amendment shouldn't have reached the ballots because its' wording was confusing. However, Spalding says the ACLU is currently working on a provisional law that will allow certain teens to by-pass notifying parents. The new law will allow teens to petition the courts to by-pass parental notification in any county. Spalding says he feels this is particularly important in North Florida, because there are many small towns.

Link

Leave it to the ACLU and PP to try to usurp the will of the people and the rights of parents.

Yeah those Dads that are raping and abusing their daughters really need to know they got their kid pregnant. Thanks for the compassionate justification Rip, as usual. </sarcasm>

what about the other 99% of cases?

Does it matter? When there is a child, affected by this law, that is being raped by their father and risks injury or worse if they have to tell their parent who is in fact the father of the unborn child carried by his daughter. There is something wrong with the law and it needs to be changed. My beef is not with the children who have a parent that knows the bounds of love do not go to molestation. My concern is with those who have predetory fathers, or other male family members, who would take advantage of them then use threats of physical harm to keep the secret quiet.

I find it disgraceful that rip is so easy to over look these cases of extreme heartlessness and living hell. Then turn around and demean those who would try to change the law so that those same children have a way to seek help in a safe and secure manner.

he he, wow, the one exception that causes a law to be dropped? wow I wish it were that easy, I'd go out and find one punk living freely off welfare, disability, SS, medicare, and get all the programs shut down!