| Author |
Message |
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
 Wed Nov 30, 2005 11:11 pm |
|
I don't think abortion with out parental consent was ever the intention of lowering the law  Again, medical procedure. Doesn't mean that because they're legally allowed to have sex they can take on such a serious medical procedure without parental consent. You're wrong on this one.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
LightningBoy
Commodore
Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.
|
| Wed Nov 30, 2005 11:32 pm |
|
| IntrepidIsMe wrote: | Then I suppose the state shouldn't have let them in bed, if they can't handle it.
Taadaa.
 |
I guess the state should keep people out of inner cities, since that's where murders most occurs.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Thu Dec 01, 2005 12:22 am |
|
Btw,
21 states require parental consent
13 states require parental notification
And there are certain circumstances in which immediate abortions would require that parents not be notified--for quickness or abuse. Those are sufficiently acceptable extreme circumstances, IMO.
But unless the life is in danger or there would be abuse, parental consent and notification (or AT LEAST the latter) is necessary, justified, and right. Parents have a right to know.
Instead of allowing abortions without consent, here's a thought: let's aggressively put forth abstinence in a forceful way. That is, really showing the consequences of what can happen with having sex and how horrible it is to live as a teenage parent, etc. That's far better than ENCOURAGING sex--which this is--because if you get pregnant, then you can just get rid of it.
And finally, I guess, Intrepid, that a 14 year old should then be able to just quit school if they wanted to? Hey, it's their life. Who are their parents to tell them no? Or maybe they should get to buy cigarrettes, drink, and do all sorts of other things they can't do now, hmmm? That's what you're saying.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Link, the Hero of Time
Vice Admiral
Joined: 15 Sep 2001
Posts: 5581
Location: Kokori Forest, Hyrule
|
| Thu Dec 01, 2005 2:07 am |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | Btw,
21 states require parental consent
13 states require parental notification
And there are certain circumstances in which immediate abortions would require that parents not be notified--for quickness or abuse. Those are sufficiently acceptable extreme circumstances, IMO.
But unless the life is in danger or there would be abuse, parental consent and notification (or AT LEAST the latter) is necessary, justified, and right. Parents have a right to know. |
only one flaw in your plan, proving abuse. To try and prove it is almost impossible. Psychologically, the victims believe it is their fault and dont say anything most of the time or are to afraid to say something.
Besides, age is not what matters, age of consent is what matters. You can argue all you want about being a minor, but it's the states all differ in age of when you can legally have sex.
| Republican_Man wrote: | | Instead of allowing abortions without consent, here's a thought: let's aggressively put forth abstinence in a forceful way. That is, really showing the consequences of what can happen with having sex and how horrible it is to live as a teenage parent, etc. That's far better than ENCOURAGING sex--which this is--because if you get pregnant, then you can just get rid of it. |
so basically, you're all for ruining the lives of people to teach them a lesson... right.
| Republican_Man wrote: | | And finally, I guess, Intrepid, that a 14 year old should then be able to just quit school if they wanted to? Hey, it's their life. Who are their parents to tell them no? Or maybe they should get to buy cigarrettes, drink, and do all sorts of other things they can't do now, hmmm? That's what you're saying. |
You're putting forth nonsense arguments to push your agenda. Buying such things as alcohol or cigarettes has nothing to do with the issue at hand.
|
|
|
Birdy
Socialist
Joined: 20 Sep 2004
Posts: 13502
Location: Here.
|
| Thu Dec 01, 2005 7:55 am |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | And now you guys want to tell me that a person as young as 12 should be able to have an abortion--and without the consent of the parents? And not only that, but one of you basically thinks 12 year olds should be able to have sex and do anything they want with they're bodies? TWELVE? Well, I'll tell you. My brother's 12, and he is--nor are any of his friends or non-friends his age that I know--not ready to take on all those privelages and make those decisions? I know that I wasn't at 12, 13--or even 14. Heck, I don't even think I'm ready NOW. But it's at 14, 13, 12, etc. that the kids really don't know what they're doing, how it will affect them, and all those things. They're not knowledgable enough, even with a doctor there. |
I think you could say they're also not ready to have a child yet, either.
| Quote: | And what happened to the rights of the parents, hmmm? Again, PARENTS have no rights with their children once they're 12 or 13? That's ridiculous. Heck, they're not even adults yet, and yet they're supposed to be able to control everything? I believe that parental rights supercede that of a child, unless there is logical reason (abuse, etc) to oppose such a thing, in cases like this--such serious cases.
I'm 15-17 years old, and this is what I believe. Sure, sometimes I think my parents' decisions are unjust, but I know that they're in the position of authority and that they have parental rights--just as they should. No one should tell them that they don't have the right to have a say in whether or not their child has an abortion--or ANY medical procedure, for that matter. |
No, kids shouldn't decide on everything. They shouldn't control everything. But it's their body, they should have a say in it, or control that what they think is right. And I think the parents should support the child in whatever decision it makes.
| Quote: | | And finally, in closing, it sends the wrong message to kids. It says basically that it's okay to have sex. It's okay to have sex, because if you do and you get pregnant, then whoa, big deal, because you can find someone to get you over to the hospital and get an abortion! |
It's not that simpel. I guess you can never understand it unless you've been through it, and if you're male, sorry, but I just don't think you can understand it, ever. The right, as a female, to do what you want with the child, is your decision. Imo.
| Quote: | You're parents won't even have to know, and you can just do it over and over again! If there's no worry for an STD (partner doesn't have one) and yet you still get pregnant, well kids, there's a way around it! Without your parents' permission, you can end it! So, it's okay to have sex! It's okay to get pregnant, because you can just end the life right away! Who cares what your parents believe because they just won't know!
...and so, kids. Go have sex! If you get pregnant, big deal!
Yeah, that's the right lesson to be teaching our children, as young as 12, that sex before marriage is not only okay, but safe in terms of pregnancy becuase you can have an abortion. Great message for the kiddies, especially when their parents are trying to teach them otherwise. Oh wait--no! Parents don't have rights! If the government and education system want to teach kids things that completely contradict the beliefs of parents in something as serious as sex. |
Why are you being so sarcastic?
I think it's okay to let kids explore themselves, and others, when they're ready. I think parents have the obligation to tell them about condoms and all sorts of other birthcontrol, about STD's and about love, but especially about the fact that they shouldn't do anything against their will.
I know not all parents do that, and I accept that. Everybody's different, and everybody has the right to raise their kids as they want to.
Another thing; I know that this is a sensitive topic for all parties, and I'm not trying to convince. I just would like you to see my side of it, my opinion, just as I can see yours. I understand you want to protect all life, and of course! Life is very special.
I just hope that someday, people in every country will have the choice to get an abortion, or not.
| Link, the Hero of Time wrote: | only one flaw in your plan, proving abuse. To try and prove it is almost impossible. Psychologically, the victims believe it is their fault and dont say anything most of the time or are to afraid to say something.
Besides, age is not what matters, age of consent is what matters. You can argue all you want about being a minor, but it's the states all differ in age of when you can legally have sex. |
My point exactly! I wanted to mention it. Abuse is so hard to prove. Even victims will deny it, as you say, because they're scared. And parents will never admit it.
-------signature-------
Nosce te ipsum
|
|
|
Leo Wyatt
Sweetest Angel
Joined: 25 Feb 2004
Posts: 19045
Location: Investigating A Crime Scene. What did Quark do this time?
|
| Thu Dec 01, 2005 8:06 am |
|
Let's play ring and around the roses ya'll? Cause we are going around in circles as always.
It is not the child's place to decide rather or not to have an abortion. It shouldn't even be done in my opinion. Just give up the baby. People just like the word kill an innocent baby. oh lovely. That is just my opinion .
|
|
|
Leo Wyatt
Sweetest Angel
Joined: 25 Feb 2004
Posts: 19045
Location: Investigating A Crime Scene. What did Quark do this time?
|
| Thu Dec 01, 2005 8:20 am |
|
Sorry to double post but I am going to post something.
It could have gone either way when it came down to the choice
to keep a life within that had no voice, it must have surely seemed the harder road to choose, to be so young and have to say had the most to lose.
But she came through like a champ and blessed the world that day
then gave hope of a better life when she gave him away
and now the innocence of joy is there each day he wakes
expression of love of his love of life in every breath he takes
he could have been thrown away before he had to chance to say:
Hey World! I am here and I got something to give
Hey World! I'm alive and I am wanting to live
It is a song of a woman who done the right thing by giving up her son to other people instead of killing him.
|
|
|
Birdy
Socialist
Joined: 20 Sep 2004
Posts: 13502
Location: Here.
|
| Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:15 am |
|
| Leo Wyatt wrote: | Abortions is wrong plan and simple... Do you want me to explain the procedure of an abortion? I won't cause if i do I will have to go throw up literally.
I know how it is done cause my sister is a nurse. She even quit being a nurse cause of it. That is my middle sister. My oldest sister had an abortion and she said she wished she had took her baby sister's advise and not get it. She is suffering from the actions she took.
Common sense is needed. Don't spread your legs girls if you don't want a baby. In rape cases, give the baby up for an adoption, It is not the baby's fault of the sins of the father. There are lots and lots of people who can not have a baby and wants to raise kids. Even younger kids, give it up. Killing an innocent life cause of selfishness is not right in my opinion. I don't want to sound like I am bashing when I am not.
There are other options and it takes some common sense to do it in. |
You know Deb, I don't agree with you on the rape part. I can't imagine what it must be like to be raped, it seems horrifying. I can understand why women (and men) can get depressed.
I think it's already a burdon to live with that, you'll remember it the rest of your life. To have a child, of your rapist, well, it just seams too cruel to me. You'd really have to carry that child against your will, just so that it lives? What if you don't? I've read many stories about women being raped, and it's not something to think about lightly.
And what about the kid? It finds out that it was born because it's mother was raped.. What a burdon to live with that!  I can't imagine!
-------signature-------
Nosce te ipsum
|
|
|
Leo Wyatt
Sweetest Angel
Joined: 25 Feb 2004
Posts: 19045
Location: Investigating A Crime Scene. What did Quark do this time?
|
| Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:32 am |
|
I can, I was raped and pregnant. I just never shared it. Did I kill the baby no! you can disagree all you want, doesn't make abortions right.
I lost my baby when I was 6 months pregnant due to ex-boyfriend who had raped me, found me and punched me and pushed me down the school stairs. He killed my baby... at least I have morals and a consceince. 
I thank God I do have my three kids that I do have. Of course they was not by rape.
|
|
|
charlie
American Soldier
Joined: 26 Feb 2004
Posts: 598
Location: In The United States
|
| Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:52 am |
|
Deb,
Don't come into this abortion thread, it is pointless. Another endless convo. I am asking you as your husband . Just cool down and go into a much happier topic.  As you said, it is going around in circles. Nobody is going to agree with anybody usually in WN. Best thing to do is just step back because it is not worth it.
|
|
|
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York
|
| Thu Dec 01, 2005 3:26 pm |
|
| LightningBoy wrote: | | IntrepidIsMe wrote: | Then I suppose the state shouldn't have let them in bed, if they can't handle it.
Taadaa.
|
I guess the state should keep people out of inner cities, since that's where murders most occurs. |
I don't see what that has to do with abortion or legal age limits.... which is what we're arguing.
-------signature-------
"Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being."
-Wuthering Heights
|
|
|
Theresa
Lux Mihi Deus
Joined: 17 Jun 2001
Posts: 27256
Location: United States of America
|
| Thu Dec 01, 2005 7:36 pm |
|
| Quote: | | It's not that simpel. I guess you can never understand it unless you've been through it, and if you're male, sorry, but I just don't think you can understand it, ever. The right, as a female, to do what you want with the child, is your decision. Imo |
It's part of the father's body that created that baby, too. But he doesn't get a say because he isn't the human incubator... But, if the child is born, the father must pay child support. Weird.
-------signature-------
Some of us fall by the wayside
And some of us soar to the stars
And some of us sail through our troubles
And some have to live with our scars
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Thu Dec 01, 2005 7:54 pm |
|
^Excellent point, Theresa. I don't think it's weird, though. I think it's just hypocricy of so many on the pro-feticide side, but that's just how I read into it.
Yeah, unless rape was involved or it was incest, the father should have a say as well. The baby's half his, and not only that, but he was the person who decided the sex of the baby, scientifically. And for him to do that, and yet not have a say...ridiculous.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
oberon
Lieutenant, Junior Grade
Joined: 26 Sep 2005
Posts: 106
|
| Thu Dec 01, 2005 8:45 pm |
|
| Theresa wrote: | | Quote: | | It's not that simpel. I guess you can never understand it unless you've been through it, and if you're male, sorry, but I just don't think you can understand it, ever. The right, as a female, to do what you want with the child, is your decision. Imo |
It's part of the father's body that created that baby, too. But he doesn't get a say because he isn't the human incubator... But, if the child is born, the father must pay child support. Weird. |
Well forgive me for saying so, but as compared to being the "human incubator", the father doesn't have to endure much. But I agree, the father should have a say in the fate of his child.
|
|
|
robbiewebster
Rear Admiral
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
Posts: 2594
Location: Rochester, New York
|
| Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:50 pm |
|
^agreed.
here's an interesting fact: up until 2001 it was legal for doctors to abort babies that were concieved any time before the 8th month of pregnancy. And if the abortion was unsuccessful they were to smother the baby. If you don't believe me ask my friend Sarah, she survived an abortion and was saved by a nurse while the doctor was out.
Anyone who talks to her and is still "pro-choice" has absolutly no compasion.
-------signature-------
|
|
|
Birdy
Socialist
Joined: 20 Sep 2004
Posts: 13502
Location: Here.
|
| Fri Dec 02, 2005 11:00 am |
|
Yeah, it is weird that the father doesn't have a 'say' in whether to abort the child or not; though I also understand the mother if she decides on her own, the child is in her body.
I'm still pro-choice, and I'm glad I have the right to have that opinion.
Do you think that because I'm pro-choice that I'm also supportive of smothering baby's at 8 months? Hm, interesting how you see that.
-------signature-------
Nosce te ipsum
|
|
|
CJ Cregg
Commodore
Joined: 05 Oct 2002
Posts: 1254
|
| Fri Dec 02, 2005 11:07 am |
|
It is possible to be Pro-Life and Pro-Choice at the same time.
You can oppose abortions but support the option for others with different opinions to yourself. Thats my opinion.
I wouldnt take away the right for people to do it, up to 20 weeks after contreception. But i oppose them personally
If someone asked me is they should get an abortion i would say do what you think is right.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Fri Dec 02, 2005 5:29 pm |
|
Oh, I'm pro-life and pro-choice; I'm just not pro-feticide. I believe in choice for guns, social security, education, and a number of other things. Just not the elimination of a developing human life. And that's not just my opinion. That's a fact.
Now, I just wanted to comment once on partial-birth abortion. One of my teachers had a baby two and a half weeks ago. She was two months premature. That's around the age that partial-birth abortions occur. It's interesting to me, how one could do such a thing. If abortion stops period on anything, it should be partial-birth abortion. Then, it should stop otherwise unless there was rape involved, the mother's life is in danger (although she should be willing to give up the baby), or the baby will have a SEVERE--SEVERE--mental defect that would make them a vegetable for all their life. But that should be detected in the early stages--the first twenty weeks or less. No more after that. However, if it's just because the woman doesn't want the baby, well, tough. Put it up for adoption. You should have thought of that before you got into bed, little missy. I am grappling with the possibility of being fine with an abortion during the FIRST week of the pregnancy--even though I still believe it's murder--to perhaps give the woman that choice--with the consent of the legitimate father (legitimate as in NOT rape father or incestual) and, in the case of a child, parents. But I haven't made a decision on whether or not to accept first week abortions. It's human life, after all, and what did that baby do to hurt anyone? Nothing. It wasn't his/her fault that they were conceived. It was the parents' fault. The ones that would be content with denying her the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness--something that we have been lucky to have.
I end this post with this quote:
Abortion is only advocated by those who have themselves been born.
--Ronald Reagan
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Link, the Hero of Time
Vice Admiral
Joined: 15 Sep 2001
Posts: 5581
Location: Kokori Forest, Hyrule
|
| Sat Dec 03, 2005 12:34 am |
|
| Theresa wrote: | | It's part of the father's body that created that baby, too. But he doesn't get a say because he isn't the human incubator... But, if the child is born, the father must pay child support. Weird. |
This feels kind of wierd saying thins to a woman, but all the Father donates is a set of genes. The woman has to deal with something growing inside of her for 8-9 months feeding off her. I think if a woman goes through that she should have more say in what happens.
| Republican_Man wrote: | | Oh, I'm pro-life and pro-choice; I'm just not pro-feticide. I believe in choice for guns, social security, education, and a number of other things. Just not the elimination of a developing human life. And that's not just my opinion. That's a fact. |
no, that's still an opinion.
| Republican_Man wrote: | I end this post with this quote:
Abortion is only advocated by those who have themselves been born.
--Ronald Reagan |
The quote is redundant and over used. Here's one:
| Quote: | "Abortion is murder and because it is murder, I believe deadly force is needed to stop it."
Convicted bomber Eric Rudolph, after being sentenced him to life in prison for setting off a remote-controlled bomb at an abortion clinic that killed an off-duty police officer and maimed a nurse. |
-------signature-------
"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism." President Thomas Jefferson
"A man's respect for law and order exists in precise relationship to the size of his paycheck." Adam Clayton Powell Jr.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Sat Dec 03, 2005 12:38 am |
|
And I disagree with that man. I think that violence to support the end of abortion is counter-productive, hypocritical, and wrong. The man'll rot in hell for what he did.
NO ONE on this forum believes in such atrocitiies, so I fail to see the logic in posting that quote.
But the Reagan quote isn't redundant. It's brilliant. You just don't want to hear it again.
And finally, all the father does is donate a set of genes!? The baby is HALF his. He went in and had sex, which resulted in it. Heck, the male even determines the sex of the baby. That's a lot of chromosome power there. Just because the woman goes through the pain of pregnancy is no reason to say tha the father shouldn't have a say and that it should only be the woman's decision.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Link, the Hero of Time
Vice Admiral
Joined: 15 Sep 2001
Posts: 5581
Location: Kokori Forest, Hyrule
|
| Sat Dec 03, 2005 1:59 am |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | And I disagree with that man. I think that violence to support the end of abortion is counter-productive, hypocritical, and wrong. The man'll rot in hell for what he did.
NO ONE on this forum believes in such atrocitiies, so I fail to see the logic in posting that quote.
But the Reagan quote isn't redundant. It's brilliant. You just don't want to hear it again. |
the quote is stupid. It's like saying the only ones who support war are the one's who've never fought or the ones who support capitalism are the one's making the money.
| Republican_Man wrote: | | And finally, all the father does is donate a set of genes!? The baby is HALF his. He went in and had sex, which resulted in it. Heck, the male even determines the sex of the baby. That's a lot of chromosome power there. Just because the woman goes through the pain of pregnancy is no reason to say tha the father shouldn't have a say and that it should only be the woman's decision. |
What does the father do to conception besides donate his genes?
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Sat Dec 03, 2005 2:13 am |
|
It's not stupid. It's a completely logical quote and makes even more sense than those two examples. But that's off topic.
To your question, the father may only contribute genes and be responsible for the gender of the child, but just think: without the father, there would BE no conception. The baby is half his. He took part in the act of sexual intercourse which lead to the creation of the baby. If he wasn't there, the baby would never have been created. So clearly the father plays an important role in it, and should most definitely have a say.
Do you really need to be explained the birds and the bees and all that? Do you need to go back to sex ed, to learn about the sperm and the egg and how they join together to form new life--how without one component, life could not exist? Therefore, the father is essential and should have a say in whether or not HIS CHILD can live.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Link, the Hero of Time
Vice Admiral
Joined: 15 Sep 2001
Posts: 5581
Location: Kokori Forest, Hyrule
|
| Sat Dec 03, 2005 11:50 am |
|
Artificial Insemination anyone?
There doesn't need to be a father just a donor of the genes.
|
|
|
Birdy
Socialist
Joined: 20 Sep 2004
Posts: 13502
Location: Here.
|
| Sat Dec 03, 2005 1:26 pm |
|
You know, I've thought about it a lot.
I think more of the future of the child, the quality of life it will have, and not quantity. For instance; if I were to get pregnant, at this point, I don't think I can give it the love and support it needs, because I'm in the middle of school. I would have to quit school, and try to take care of it.
If I would abort it, I would continue with school, finish my education, I would get a job, and when I'm ready for it, I can give it much more love and support at that point.
Of course, there's no way to predict what life the child would have, but to put the quantity of life before quality, and I get the impression that some people on this forum do, isn't a good thing imo. If you, as a mother (and father) think that this isn't the right time, that you can't give it as much love as you think it needs, I can't imagine you would be forced to keep it.
Especially when you're like 12 years old.
-------signature-------
Nosce te ipsum
|
|
|
LightningBoy
Commodore
Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.
|
| Sat Dec 03, 2005 1:32 pm |
|
By that logic, we should kill all the homeless.
Hey why not? More room for the rest of us, more QUALITY in life, less QUANTITY.
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Star Trek �, in all its various forms, are trademarks & copyrights of Paramount Pictures
This site has no official connection with Star Trek or Paramount Pictures
Site content/Site design elements owned by Morphy and is meant to only be an archive/Tribute to STV.com
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
