Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it,
follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given
their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
New Oklahoma Abortion Law: Going Too Far
Posts
Probably because nobody enjoys abortions. For most people even a zygote has a nonzero value. I don't value it as much as children, cats, and to a lesser extent, shrubbery, but it's still a nonzero value. That's why the position is called pro-choice and not pro-babymurder. It's also why late-term abortions are ickier than early term, because I think a lot of people feel a fetus accrues intrinsic worth as it becomes more like us.
tl;dr: Well, duh, nobody likes it, but it's the lesser of two evils.
Edit: To be clear, I'm not being patronizing to RedShell, but to the moron who phrases a polling question so broadly.
Invite me: XBox Live | PS3 | Steam
Link to me: Number Sorter | Achievement Generator
I find the characterisation of 15, 16, 17 year olds as being so completely stupid as to not be able to judge whether or not they want a baby as utterly asinine. Teenagers aren't wandering idiots; the main impediment to their reasoning comes from hormones, which only affects certain spheres of life.
The worst case scenario of a hasty abortion is some regret, which pales in comparison to an unwanted baby. You can always just have a baby later; you can't get rid of them.
Of course, then I have to point of that there've been several pyschological studies that seem to show adults across the board are not very good at predicting what will make them the happiest in the future.
There are those woman who act as though having an abortion ruined their lives, however, whom you see at Pro-Life rallies.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
The worst case scenario of a hasty abortion is just "some regret"?
When my best friend had an abortion, back in those halycon days of teenagerdom, she slumped in to a HUGE depression. She probably would have come close to a suicide attempt, if she hadn't gotten a kitten soon after, who she transfered any care-taking urges on to. Horomones are a LOT more affective than you think, and add to that the fact that teenagers simply lack life-experience, and no ammount of rational book knowledge, or what have you, can make up for that.
Teenagers are not emotionally prepared to deal with certain situations. Heck, many twenty-somethings aren't.
I'm not in favor of parental consent laws, though. I think having some kind of mandatory entrace (and possibly exit) counseling would make far more sense, provided that it is designed ONLY to help the lady cope with her situation, and is not hijacked in to a tool to scare or guilt her.
'Twould be ideal, but pretty much impossible unfortunately; especially when done at the state-level.
I'd honestly agree (at least for minors) if I thought there was any chance whatsoever that that last bit would ever happen.
Do you mind if I ask if you are a teenager right now?
There is no way that this will not come off as talking down to you, and I honestly apologize for that.
It seems, though, that many teenagers fight for their right to be considered equals, only to grow up, look back, and realize how much more immature they were then than they realized.
And in fact this decision isn't made in a vacuum. Most clinics have a waiting period of at least a day before the procedure is performed, and will always give the patient as much information as they can to help her make a decision either way.
So yeah, teenagers are capable of making this decision, even if the situation is not ideal, without their parents' guidance.
It's worth fighting for, IMO, and parental consent laws are NO substitution, since they create a whole new barrel of issues.
Edit: the way to do it would be to do it through the "industry" itself, rather than through law. Have clinics agree on such counseling being considered as an industrial standard, or something.
Hell, I'm 28 and I still feel like I'm struggling to act in a mature fashion, let alone 10-15 years ago.
If you're talking about the Baby Boomers, they look back and think how stupid they were to use drugs while high on antidepressants.
This isn't really relevant, though. There are health-reasons why you can't take this decision away from the woman who it pertains to.
Drunks Against Mad Mothers
You say that as if the same thing doesn't apply to middle-aged people looking back on their thirties.
I'm not; and don't mind you asking. I echo the sentiments everyone else has just voiced about how personal growth is continuous.
This is correct, it's levied against the practice per instance. And if you just pad the expected bill by 10k for fines from breaking federal law, it's all sorts of fraud.
Occasionally HIPAA does something right. Most of the time it regulates the wrong shit. Such as this being against federal law for fucking BILLING reasons, not the patient's right to not have unneeded medical proceedures.
edit: to clarify the stupidity of the clause, this only fines you if you bill the proceedure to an insurance company, not a patient. If it's an uninsured thing that shows up on the patient's door, there's no protection against unneccessary proceedures.
So, because growth is continuous, do we let three years olds vote?
Lines have to be drawn in the sand somewhere. Some age has to be picked as thae age at which we assume people have had enough life experience and learning to be accountable. Our society picks 18, for whatever arbitrary reason. If you're going to start arguing that 15 year olds are mature enough, then why aren't 11 year olds, etc.?
This is getting pretty far off topic, though. Maybe it would be a good topic for another thread.
No, because growth is continuous if we let three year-olds vote, we let them choose their own candidates. Not that this is even remotely analogous and therefor not the least bit relevant.
Drunks Against Mad Mothers
Go back and read my original arguments before assuming you see secret statements beneath my posts.
I am STAUNCHLY against parental consent laws.
I read your original argument. I didn't make any claims about what you do or don't support. Perhaps you should go find a message board that's in the language you're literate in.
Drunks Against Mad Mothers
Where did I say that young people shouldn't be allowed to make their own choices, then?
Once again claiming I made claims that I didn't make. I get it, you must be so super-duper-literate that you can even read things that aren't even there!
Which I guess makes your usage of "literate" a synonym for "tripping balls".
Drunks Against Mad Mothers
What argument have I made in this thread that you take issue with?
Drunks Against Mad Mothers
If there aren't any, then what is your point?
My point is that your analogy is broken and irrelevant. Just like I said. Come back when you're off the hallucinogens.
Drunks Against Mad Mothers
Because you were already making a fuss BEFORE I made that analogy.
Seriously, I'm flattered, but I'm not in to you like that.
No, I'm pointing out that allowing/prohibiting a 3 year-old from voting is not analogous to giving the decision of whether or not to have an abortion to anyone other than the woman it pertains to. "loltroll" is not a substitute for an actual argument, imbecile.
Drunks Against Mad Mothers
Which is NOT the analogy that I was making.
As I said before, read my fucking posts before assuming you know what I'm saying. I have been very clear that the choice blongs to NO ONE other than the woman, regardless of her age.
edit: I'm done with you. If all that you're going to do is accuse me of having ulterior motives, and follow me between threads trolling me without actually reading what I've posted, then you've made it clear that you've got nothing to contribute, and are only dragging the threads off course. Don't bother responding to any of my posts in the future, because I won't be reading yours.
It was brought up as an argument in favor of the claim that teenagers are not mature enough to make decisions for themselves. Actually given the particular choices made in that analogy it was more brought up to mock the idea that teenagers can make decisions for themselves than to argue anything. Despite your claim that you oppose parental consent laws you are arguing in favor of them and doing a pretty abysmal job of it. And "loltroll" still does not constitute an argument, imbecile.
Drunks Against Mad Mothers
If only we could get rapists to wear condoms.
Pokemon Black 2: 0519-5108-3139
We could always blame rape-babies on the victims, because if they didn't want a rape-baby, they should have been on the pill...
Oh, I like that.
Pokemon Black 2: 0519-5108-3139
Who said anything at all about taking choices away from women?
Wow.
How exactly did you think the ability of teenagers to act in a mature fashion was relevant in the context of an abortion-law discussion?
Drunks Against Mad Mothers
I was merely commenting on how little things change 10-15 years later (though of course there is an immense amount of growth between a 15 year old and a 25 year old, in terms of emotional and intellectual maturity, or so one would hope). I'm sure in my late 30's and early 40's I'll look back on my late 20's and wonder what the hell I was thinking half the time.
That wasn't a statement condemning the right of a woman (teenage or otherwise) to make choices about her health and body, just a general observation regarding the more things change the more they stay the same in regards to maturity. (or at least anecdotally)
And so then my claim that your remark wasn't really relevant is spot-on. I don't see how you're finding something to argue with.
Drunks Against Mad Mothers
Why does it have to be an argument? The law is reprehensible, we've established that much. Now we're just dancing the Right To Life / Choice Tango for the nth time.