| Click here to go to the original topic View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Ek0nomik
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 2065
Location: La Fleur
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 27, 2006 8:17 pm Post subject: Interstate Abortion Bill |
|
|
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2237820&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312
I have always hated the "it's her body, and she can do what she wants with it!" argument. But in this case, let's set aside the abortion argument.
A girl who is 16, shouldn't be forced to tell her parents what she's doing with her body. Whether or not you think she has human life in her stomach, this is simply a violation of liberty. I don't care what your stance on abortion is, 18 isn't the proper cut off for female permission to privacy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
JayDubya
Joined: 15 Jun 2006
Posts: 1813
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 27, 2006 8:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry, but I respectfully disagree. A minor has to get parental consent for a great many things of far less urgency / importance than this one, and minors aren't treated equally in terms of civil rights, laws, and criminal punishment.
The "right to privacy" in and of itself with regards to abortion is an artificial construct of Harry Blackmun with little to no backing in the Constitution. |
|
| Back to top |
|
JackarooSundown
Joined: 29 Oct 2005
Posts: 433
Location: Three thirty.
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 27, 2006 10:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I think in many cases, a parent's guidance is helpful. Having an abortion can scar the mind of a young girl for life, many parents would quite possibly rather have their daughter have the child and then help support it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
ShirzadianM
Joined: 27 Jun 2006
Posts: 140
Location: Ohio
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 28, 2006 12:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
JayDubya wrote: Sorry, but I respectfully disagree. A minor has to get parental consent for a great many things of far less urgency / importance than this one, and minors aren't treated equally in terms of civil rights, laws, and criminal punishment.
The "right to privacy" in and of itself with regards to abortion is an artificial construct of Harry Blackmun with little to no backing in the Constitution.
I mostly agree, however the right to privacy was not established by Blackmun but by Douglas in Griswold...
http://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/case/149/abstract |
|
| Back to top |
|
Selfish_Meme
Joined: 31 Jan 2006
Posts: 726
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 28, 2006 5:00 am Post subject: Re: Interstate Abortion Bill |
|
|
Ek0nomik wrote: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2237820&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312
I have always hated the "it's her body, and she can do what she wants with it!" argument. But in this case, let's set aside the abortion argument.
A girl who is 16, shouldn't be forced to tell her parents what she's doing with her body. Whether or not you think she has human life in her stomach, this is simply a violation of liberty. I don't care what your stance on abortion is, 18 isn't the proper cut off for female permission to privacy.
There are so many things wrong with this, 16 Year Olds who can't even be responsible to drink or vote being responsible for bringing up children, fetuses in 'stomach's'. The right to privacy for minors I think is what you are railing against.
In that respect I agree with the bill. As long as someone is not fully legally responsible for their actions then they do not have full rights under the law, including the right to privacy. You may be mature enough to handle the responsibility but the majority of 16 Year Olds could not be trusted to be equally grown up. This would result in a reduction of the quality of life of everyone.
The rest of the bill as far as I am concerened is hideous. Recently a 15 Year Old girl raped in Ireland was forcibly stopped from going to England to get an abortion. Good luck America. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Ek0nomik
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 2065
Location: La Fleur
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 29, 2006 7:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm not saying that parents guidance isn't helpful. Far from it. What all of you are assuming is this: A female has parents who love her, thus, this female can go talk to her parents because she isn't mature enough to handle the responsibility.
If a young girl has parents who she knows she can trust, chances are, either this wouldn't have happened in the first place, or if it did happen, she would talk to her parents.
Divorce rates ring a bell anyone? A lot of kids don't have good relationships with their parents, even if they are still married. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Selfish_Meme
Joined: 31 Jan 2006
Posts: 726
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 30, 2006 4:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ek0nomik wrote: I'm not saying that parents guidance isn't helpful. Far from it. What all of you are assuming is this: A female has parents who love her, thus, this female can go talk to her parents because she isn't mature enough to handle the responsibility.
If a young girl has parents who she knows she can trust, chances are, either this wouldn't have happened in the first place, or if it did happen, she would talk to her parents.
Divorce rates ring a bell anyone? A lot of kids don't have good relationships with their parents, even if they are still married.
I get your point and the legislation should take into account those instances where a child may have been abused. However the majority are still brought up in fairly reasonable environments and the law should reflect that mostly. It should also reflect that teenagers act rashly, not because of a bad upbringing but just because of inexperience or bad judgement, and that is why parents should know. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Ek0nomik
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 2065
Location: La Fleur
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 30, 2006 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Selfish_Meme wrote: I get your point and the legislation should take into account those instances where a child may have been abused.
It won't.
Selfish_Meme wrote: However the majority are still brought up in fairly reasonable environments and the law should reflect that mostly. It should also reflect that teenagers act rashly, not because of a bad upbringing but just because of inexperience or bad judgement, and that is why parents should know.
I agree, to an extent. In all honesty, what makes good parenting? I bet your answer, and mine, would be quite similair. However, not everybody sees it the same way. Some people don't see parenting as a responsibility at all. I just graduated from high school a little over a year ago, and now I'm in college. I know people who absolutely hated their parents in high school, and I know kids like that in college too. Just because the bad relationship with parents exists, still doesn't even necessarily mean that a girl will get pregnant.
A friend of mine at college doesn't get along with either of his parents whatsoever. However, he has plenty of morals, and not letting his girlfriend get pregnant would be one of them (abstaining from sex until marriage is the ticket I'm going for here. Also, I'm not saying that abstinence is something that should be practiced by everyone because of morals).
The main point I am trying to get across is this: Good parenting, proper upbrining, there's no real definition to those phrases. Even if someone is an excellent parent, a child has to make mistakes to learn. Abortion isn't the proper way to learn, but neither is having a child years before you're ready.
I feel as though this law is also absolutely hypocritic towards the Democrats. They are supposed to be the party in favor of 'pro-choice' values. Now let's assume two different things.
First: The pregnant woman is carrying life. If that's the case, than abortion should be outlawed immediately. Although, you and I both know this can't be proven, it's a matter of judgement. However, if abortion is killing a human person every single time it takes place, than why is it legal?
Second: The pregnant woman isn't carrying life. If that's the case, than why are we passing laws like this? It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
Make up your mind Dems. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Click here to go to the original topic |
|
