The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: BattleHymn on January 10, 2012, 08:19:32 PM
-
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002142367
Most of the primitives that are somewhat OK with the girls choice are visibly bummed out about it. Most of the remainder are disappointed that she can't be forced into an abortion. How many different instances can we find of the primitives beating around the bush, when in reality, they really want to shout "kill! kill!! KILL!!"?:
The Straight Story
Girl, 14, Sues Family to Stop Abortion
(CN) - A state court in Corpus Christi, Texas, extended an order preventing a 14-year-old girl's family from forcing her to get an abortion.
The girl filed a temporary restraining order against her family on Dec. 21 after they scheduled an appointment for her to get an abortion, according to the Corpus Christi Caller-Times.
She is represented by attorneys with the Texas Center for Defense of Life, an Austin-based nonprofit.
Stephen Casey, chief counsel for the group, told the Caller Times that "she has the people she's relied on her whole life pushing her in the direction she doesn't want to go."
...
The Caller-Times reported that three of the girl's family members who attended the hearing last week told the judge they did not have an attorney to represent them. One of her cousins described the teen as mentally unstable and said she was not capable of making the decision to keep her baby, according to the Caller-Times.
http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/01/09/42861.htm
Vincardog
2. I am not sure that a challenged 14 year old is a "woman" I am glad I am not the judge
Last edited Mon Jan 9, 2012, 11:47 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)
one
MedicalAdmin
18. Legally she is a minor and has limited rights.
Last edited Mon Jan 9, 2012, 11:17 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)
I think emancipation is the only route she can go, but my guess is that she will get her wish and the parents will get to raise the kids kid.
A thought occurs to me - who is the father?
two
Snake Alchemist
13. I have been told on other topics that a 14 year old cannot be held responsible for their actions.
Do to their undeveloped brains.
three
Charlemagne
87. Well, you see,
if it is something that we disagree with, then the 14 year old should be regarded as a child and has no say.
However, if it is something that we like, then the 14 year old is regarded as a mature young person with all the rights and privileges pertaining thereto.
troll!!
salvorhardin
34. That's the road my thoughts were going down
It's unwinnable. And she's gotten sucked into the clutches of some anti-choice group too, no doubt presenting a constant barrage of propaganda and "caring" reinforcement.
four
MattBaggins
62. If it is "Crisis Pregnancy Centers" they will coddle her
until the baby is born. They will then sell the baby off and dump the girl in the street.
It is a pity that such a situation exists but I can only see erring on the side of the girl. It is just not even fathomable to start forcing abortions on women.
Uh huh. What a pity. Five.
musette_sf
105. And after they traffic the baby
they will relentlessly guilt her and brainwash her into self-loathing, and get a new lifetime customer for their phony baloney "post-abortive trauma survivor services" group.
So, to recap, they'll brainwash her (already have) into keeping a pregnancy that would have better been terminated, for everyone concerned; they''ll steal the baby when the baby is born, and sell it to the highest bidder via the usual human trafficking criminals (aka the "adoption" mills); then, they'll brainwash her into feeling guilty about it all, because without sufficient victim-blaming, she just might go forward to live a good life for herself without patriarchal misogynistic "approval".
six
Star Member barbtries
58. so do i.
it is a toughie. i tend to believe that an abortion is probably the best route here. but to make her undergo that against her will, i don't think i can go that far.
seven
uppityperson
156. yup. Had a friend run across some of those foul people.
she ended up getting an abortion about 16 weeks, said it was the turning point for her, has fought against "abortion help centers" since since.
Seems like this girl is being used also.
eight
(an interesting exchange):
Lance_Boyle
4. As long as her family can legally disown her and any financial obligation to her, let her choose.
If her choice can legally stick her family with an unwanted burden then they should have a say, too. [/b]
nine
FedUpWithIt All
14. Would you say the same if this was a teen being forced to continue a pregnancy? n/t
Lance_Boyle
41. The same would not apply, because the only burden imposed on the family on that case
would be the cost of the abortion.
ehrnst
39. I think that the issue of custody of a child that is born would be another issue
if the burden you are talking about is the support of the infant. I'm no lawyer, but making the case that she's not competent to raise the child would not be so controversial. I believe that the family may be within their rights to put the infant up for adoption, if a family member does not want to raise the child.
And they certainly cannot abandon the daughter without making arrangements for her care.
No, I don't think that the daughter should be made to legally choose between her parents and having a baby, anymore than she should be forced to choose between her parents and an abortion - which is what parental consent laws try in part to do.
ten
(more primitive love):
leftyohiolib
68. a child is an "unwanted burden" wow, that's cold blooded
those who dont know history (and those who do ) are doomed to relive it
lapislzi
82. Oh? Says who?
A burden is on the back of the burdened.
I, for one, would adamantly refuse to raise a grandchild should my teenage daughter become pregnant.
That's what choice is all about. If my kid chooses to bear a child, she must bear responsibility for that choice.
I love my daughter, but that doesn't mean I want to raise her baby. And she knows that.
Scout
133. fine, take your warm heart and YOU raise all the unwanted children of other people
jesus h christ on a ****ing pogo stick.
eleven
ehrnst
88. And sometimes they become abused and neglected.
We don't force childrearing on anyone, for exactly that reason. No one is forced by law to raise a child. One must make the proper arrangements and not abandon the child, but, even a society that will force childbearing on an unwilling woman sees the danger in assuming that forcing parenthood on someone is a danger to the child.
Yes, most women that carry an unplanned pregnancy to term keep the infant - she's not an incubator, and a bond will more often than not come to pass - even if the person is grossly unfit to be a parent.
I have seen disastrous results in my own family when a 14 year old wanted an abortion, was refused, then alternately abused and negelect the child. People said, "Oh the maternal instinct will take over, and we can't just let her get out of the responsibility. She played, she pays."
What is more abusive than murder? Oh, and twelve.
ehrnst
9. The issue will indeed come down to competency.
And studies have shown that minors who make the decision to carry a pregnancy are often less mature and realistic about their life options than those who choose to terminate a pregnancy.
However, anti-choice groups say the opposite is true.
Either way, I would not want to be the judge here.
If nothing else, the girl can be determined not competent to be a parent. The evaluations would have to be done quickly, due to the nature of the case.
I wonder how easy it would have been to get a lawyer in Texas to take her case if she had been suing to get an abortion against her parents wishes - most laws restricting access to abortion for minors require a judge to make a decision regarding competency in order for the minor to bypass parental consent.
thirteen
ehrnst
81. And this Republican judge will have to use all the Pro-choice arguments
View profile
about teens being competent to make decisions about their own bodies in this ruling.
Childbearing is far more dangerous than abortion for a 14 year old, and a judge will have to take that into account prior to ruling.
I am pro-choice, and I am also someone that personally feels that childbearing and childrearing are devalued most by those that claim to be "pro-life" - they see it as a default, not a choice.
I would like to see how they get around the use of the word Choice, which they hate. I imagine they will hijack the rhetoric of the Pro-choice movement to make it look like false equivalency.
And, as I've stated before - this is all moot. There is no abortion provider in the country that would force her to have an abortion, unless she was unconscious and bleeding to death from her uterus - and that would be in an emergency room.
There is no such thing as forced abortion on the part of a legal abortion provider in this country. The fact that these lawyers are getting so many people to debate as though it was is a victory for them.
fourteen
Raffi Ella
26. Well, and that's another sad part of this-
She's being used as a pawn for right to life groups. But still, her choice.
fifteen
Wait Wut
22. I agree with your statement, but...
...I'm not ready to say I support her decision. She's still a 14 year old girl. Her health, the babies health, the responsibility, are all things that need to be taken into consideration. I'm not saying that she should be "forced" to have an abortion. She needs guidance and counseling from a neutral agent. Not someone who is going to tell her that God will either reward or punish her.
My opinion would be the same if the arguments were reversed, btw. This is a bad situation from any direction.
sixteen
ehrnst
28. There is also her health to consider - by definition, it's a high risk pregnancy.
Her fetus will compete with the mother's growing body for many things she will need. And depending on her physical stature and maturity, full term pregnancy may be detremental to her health.
seventeen and a half points. Bonus points awarded for talking about the child like it is a parasite.
KansDem
31. She's 14 and a minor
She cannot sign contracts. She cannot drive an automobile. She cannot drink alcohol or consume tabacco products.
I suppose the question should be asked: "Is a 14 year-old capable of making a decision like this one?" Or should medical decisions involving 14 year-olds be made by the parents or legal guardian?
eighteen
ehrnst
159. At 14, without family support - she won't be able to parent that baby.
In any case - forced abortion is not going to happen. Abortion providers would not proceed once she declines consent.
This situation is about the judge trying to stop her family from coercing her - which wouldn't even be an issue if she wanted an abortion against their will.
nineteen
Donald Ian Rankin
160. A 14 year old is *not* a woman.
My "feelings" are relevant in that I have a vote, and one of the things that I would vote for is *not* letting children, including 14-year-olds, make all their own decisions.
To reiterate/clarify what I said earlier: in my view, this is nothing to do with women's rights. It's about children's rights, which I think in many ways should be strictly limited. I don't think this is one of them, but it's not as black-and-white an issue as you think, I think.
I think your claim that no doctor would perform an abortion on an unwilling patient is probably mistaken. I'm sure that no doctor would perform an abortion on an unwilling mentally sound adult; I'm fairly sure that many *would* perform abortions on children even if the child didn't want it.
twenty
Mosby
96. I think it should be up to the parents
A minor is a minor, is the courts change that then what?
twenty-one
hamsterjill
103. I wonder how much influence is being put on her
View profile
By the Texas Center for Defense of Life to continue the pregnancy? Just wondering...
If it is indeed her choice to continue with the pregnancy, if she is deemed capable to make that choice, and if her family is off the hook for any burden that the pregnancy might put on them, then I'm for choice.
But I must say that if this young lady were my daughter, I would be trying to convince her to end the pregnancy.
twenty-two
obamanut2012
108. No enough information yet
View profile
1. Who is the father?
2. IS she mentally challenged?
3. Was she pressured in anyway to keep the baby?
4. Do her parents have legal guardianship of her still?
I doubt she met the age of consent. She is a child. Choice is choice to an extent, but this is not only a minor, but a child. We don't let 14-yuear-olds choose to smoke or drink or do drugs, or date someone much older than them, or move out and live alone, or decide to move to Colombia. Unless the family is trying to hid something, ie incest, then I say they have the right to make the choice for their child.
She also needs to be evaluated.
If the person who impregnated her is 18 or older, they need to be arrested.
I would like to know what undue influence this anti abortion group has on her.
A court would never emancipate a child that young, although they can give legal guardianship to someone else.
This girl has no idea what she is agreeing to.
twenty-three
Texasgal
110. This is a tough one.
View profile
She is pregnant illegally, meaning that whoever the male in this has broken the law. Statutory rape. It's against the law.
At 14 I believe her parents need to make her medical decision a for her. I will agree that this is a very tough situation. It's unfortunate that she is pregnant at such a young age. I am not sure how I personally would handle this situation. Very tough.
twenty-four
Liquorice
124. It would be an abdication of responsibility to put their daughter in foster care. It would
also be a cold and unloving move.They have a responsibility for their child through good and bad. You can't just give up your kid to the state because she got pregnant. What kind of sick parent would do such a thing? They have to take care of her and their grandchild, unless the daughter decides to give up the baby for adoption.
Look around, this thread is rife with them.
Suji to Seoul
143. This seems cut and dry. Unless she is petitioning for emancipation, the family can control their
child and do not need her permission. She's 14.
She is a minor. . .where is the mental check on her?
And the ghouls that support her are just using her to push an anti-choice agenda.
twenty-five
hughee99
154. Exactly! She's 14. The family can control her and don't need her permission.
This is why we should all be fighting to make sure anyone under 18 who goes to a doctor for an abortion has parental approval first. After all, this is the parents decision to make, not hers... Right?
No replies to this one yet. :popcorn:
-
Lance_Boyle
4. As long as her family can legally disown her and any financial obligation to her, let her choose.
If her choice can legally stick her family with an unwanted burden then they should have a say, too.
Yet the father of a bay has no choice? Hm, the DUmmies put more standing in the material than in the life of the unborn baby.
-
Charlemagne
87. Well, you see,
if it is something that we disagree with, then the 14 year old should be regarded as a child and has no say.
However, if it is something that we like, then the 14 year old is regarded as a mature young person with all the rights and privileges pertaining thereto.
Nice catch, and pretty much the same point I wanted to make.
KansDem
31. She's 14 and a minor
She cannot sign contracts. She cannot drive an automobile. She cannot drink alcohol or consume tabacco products.
I suppose the question should be asked: "Is a 14 year-old capable of making a decision like this one?" Or should medical decisions involving 14 year-olds be made by the parents or legal guardian?
eighteen
I love this one... So, let me go out on a limb here and say if she wanted to abort it and the parents wanted to keep it would this thread not be 165 replies of high fives?
-
To be a progressive you have to be hypocrite.
-
To be a progressive you have to be hypocrite.
According to the Obamanut2012 primitive, "choice is choice, to an extent."
You just don't understand!! :fuelfire:
-
Lance_Boyle 4. As long as her family can legally disown her and any financial obligation to her, let her choose.
If her choice can legally stick her family with an unwanted burden then they should have a say, too.
I consider liberals an unwanted burden. Can we start killing them too?
-
I consider liberals an unwanted burden. Can we start killing them too?
Yes you may.
-
Yes you may.
But I want the government to pay for it. :bawl:
-
But I want the government to pay for it. :bawl:
Closet liberal...alert alert alert.
-
Well, at least a few of them actually noticed that this was probably statutory rape. It appears to have taken 40 replies for the first mention. No wonder Planned Parenthood gets away with performing abortions on kids and not reporting the rapes.
:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
Can anyone count the number of threads we've seen in which they argue that a 14 year old is fully old enough to decide to have her child murdered? It's late, and I don't think I have time to count that high... ::) ::) Of course, "murder" is such a simple choice, while "life" is so complex and punishing. ::) ::)
-
Let me get this right.
A 14 year-old is old enough to decide to have an abortion without anybody else interfering or even knowing, but a 14 year-old isn't old enough to decide not to have an abortion. Am I missing something, or is this not a case of -pro-choice, but rather pro-abortion...pro-death?
-
Let me get this right.
A 14 year-old is old enough to decide to have an abortion without anybody else interfering or even knowing, but a 14 year-old isn't old enough to decide not to have an abortion. Am I missing something, or is this not a case of -pro-choice, but rather pro-abortion...pro-death?
Do not try to understand DUmmie ways of thinking. It can be hazardous to your mental health.
-
That's why the thread is so long. Once you put hypocrisy into words, you have to then spin the hell out of them to try and justify it.
This thread was disgusting, and after a while, I could only skim it. I couldn't take any more of them. I'm not rowing over. The bloodthirstiness! Kill the Fetus!! And that line, "the fetus will compete with her body for what she needs." I nearly hurled. DUmbass makes it sound like a tapeworm.
-
Wow. To see these people twist themselves into pretzels trying to explain why they're pro-choice except when the wrong choice is made... Remember, these same people oppose parental notification laws if there's a chance that it will lead to one less dead baby.
-
I'm like Karen, coulden't be bothered to read all the tripe. However, was adoption ever mentioned?
-
So are they for or against parental notification laws?
-
MedicalAdmin
18. Legally she is a minor and has limited rights.
For a 14 year old, her Parents have to sign a waiver for her to get an Aspirin in School, for a Surgical Procedure her Parents have to sign for her, hmm
but for a 14 year old to get an Abortion she can do so without her Parents permission
So in the mind of the left? a minor has limited rights when it suits their agenda?
-
Abortion is legal in most States up to 24 weeks, here's a Baby at 22 weeks, is this just a blob of cells, you decide:
(http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj140/RepublicanandProud/fetusweek22.jpg)
(http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj140/RepublicanandProud/fetusweek23.jpg)
(http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj140/RepublicanandProud/fetusweek21.jpg)
-
So in the mind of the left? a minor has limited rights when it suits their agenda?
That's correct. Which makes their argument null and void in my mind and the mind of most logical Americans. The problem is, not that many people actually get to see their hypocrisy and we all know the MSM will not report it.
-
Reading a thread like that gives an awful lot of evidence supporting 100-200 trimester abortions...with prejudice. Not just the callousness of their views but due to the flexibility of their views. Just more proof that Liberalism is a mental disease.
-
I'm like Karen, coulden't be bothered to read all the tripe. However, was adoption ever mentioned?
Yes
So, to recap, they'll brainwash her (already have) into keeping a pregnancy that would have better been terminated, for everyone concerned; they''ll steal the baby when the baby is born, and sell it to the highest bidder via the usual human trafficking criminals (aka the "adoption" mills); then, they'll brainwash her into feeling guilty about it all, because without sufficient victim-blaming, she just might go forward to live a good life for herself without patriarchal misogynistic "approval".
Admittedly, there might have been other mentions. I couldn't wade through it all either.
-
So, to recap, they'll brainwash her (already have) into keeping a pregnancy that would have better been terminated, for everyone concerned; they''ll steal the baby when the baby is born, and sell it to the highest bidder via the usual human trafficking criminals (aka the "adoption" mills); then, they'll brainwash her into feeling guilty about it all, because without sufficient victim-blaming, she just might go forward to live a good life for herself without patriarchal misogynistic "approval".
So, to recap, you piece of shit, you'll make up any kind of bullshit senario to further your abortion agenda.
DU lurkers, you "people" suck.
-
According to the thread (at least what I could stomach), DUers think that killing a fetus is better than allowing a loving childless couple to adopt. They make adoption agencies sound like the devil...
-
According to the thread (at least what I could stomach), DUers think that killing a fetus is better than allowing a loving childless couple to adopt. They make adoption agencies sound like the devil...
That just made me wonder... Would the direction of this thread be any different if a gay couple stepped up to adopt the child?
-
That just made me wonder... Would the direction of this thread be any different if a gay couple stepped up to adopt the child?
I always said the left will put restrictions on abortions if it comes down to 2 things, selecting a gender ie more girl babies being killed than boy babies, and if a gene is ever found predicting homosexuality and a test can be done in utero.
Since leftists are free to register here I'll ask this question since I can't ask it at DU, would you put restrictions on abortions if the Parent wanted to terminate a pregnancy because the baby is a girl? and if a test could be done predicting whether or not the child is homosexual would you agree to allowing those Parents to have an abortion performed for just that reason? My answer is no to both, I guess I'm more feminist and more of a gay rights activist/advocate than you are!
-
You don't even have to go all the way to 22 weeks to clearly see a fetus is NOT a ball of cells. The majority of abortions are done between 8-13 weeks. The baby is clearly not a ball of cells even at that stage:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwhIx-QZkB0&feature=related
I have never ceased to be amazed at how human and precious a life is even at the earliest stage. How you can view something like that and then still go on to kill it and justify that murder is beyond me:(