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

1246789

Posts

  • MedopineMedopine __BANNED USERS
    edited April 2008
    I'm a big supporter of contraception over abortion, partly because it makes a lot of this controversy go away.

    Oh please, lets not throw that shit into the fan.

    It's pretty hard to have an abortion if you aren't pregnant.

    In fact, I might say it's impossible.

  • Casually HardcoreCasually Hardcore Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Yeah, it's just that it would result in 90 pages of back and forth arguments (I used that term loosely) about whether or not it's wrong to have sex, whether or not we should teach our children about sex, and so on.

    steam_sig.png
  • EvanderEvander Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Medopine wrote: »
    I'm a big supporter of contraception over abortion, partly because it makes a lot of this controversy go away.

    Oh please, lets not throw that shit into the fan.

    It's pretty hard to have an abortion if you aren't pregnant.

    In fact, I might say it's impossible.

    I agree, but abortion still needs to be protected for those cases where the contraception didn't happen.

    georgersig.jpg
  • SithDrummerSithDrummer Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Medopine wrote: »
    I'm a big supporter of contraception over abortion, partly because it makes a lot of this controversy go away.

    Oh please, lets not throw that shit into the fan.

    It's pretty hard to have an abortion if you aren't pregnant.

    In fact, I might say it's impossible.
    Immaculate abortion?

    It's an easy game to hate
  • KageraKagera Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Okay I'll admit I overreacted earlier, it just angers me every time I think about it.

    "Hey Mrs. Baxter, before we proceed with the abortion I am going to need to give you a vaginal ultrasound."

    "What's it for?"

    "I'm legally required to show you the fetus and explain what parts have grown and if it has a heartbeat and the like."

    "But I don't WANT to see it, I just want it out of me."

    "I apologize, but this procedure must be done if you would like to abort."

    "So you're going to use my own body against me to try to make me change my mind?"

    "I'm sorry, it's the law."

    Yeah, that makes me a tad irrational.

    “This is America. We’re entitled to our opinions.”
    “Wrong. This is Texas. And my opinion is the only one that counts."
  • Wonder_HippieWonder_Hippie __BANNED USERS
    edited April 2008
    Really, all it is is an attempt to guilt trip women. It's so blatantly transparent. You don't need to make it anything other than what it is to realize that it's abhorrent. Just plain evil all on its own.

    Spoiler:
  • ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS
    edited April 2008
    Medopine wrote: »
    I'm a big supporter of contraception over abortion, partly because it makes a lot of this controversy go away.

    Oh please, lets not throw that shit into the fan.

    It's pretty hard to have an abortion if you aren't pregnant.

    In fact, I might say it's impossible.

    Irrelevant. Abortion isn't analogous to contraception, they do not expressly function as substitutes for one another. Yes, contraception is great, but it doesn't inherently forgo the need for abortion. You can use contraception religiously and still end up needing an abortion, ergo "contraception over abortion" doesn't make sense in a policy-discussion.

    Edit: The "it makes a lot of this controversy go away" bit should have indicated to you that you don't want to be on this guy's side, because no it fucking doesn't.

    DAMM
    Drunks Against Mad Mothers
  • MedopineMedopine __BANNED USERS
    edited April 2008
    Medopine wrote: »
    I'm a big supporter of contraception over abortion, partly because it makes a lot of this controversy go away.

    Oh please, lets not throw that shit into the fan.

    It's pretty hard to have an abortion if you aren't pregnant.

    In fact, I might say it's impossible.

    Irrelevant. Abortion isn't analogous to contraception, they do not expressly function as substitutes for one another. Yes, contraception is great, but it doesn't inherently forgo the need for abortion. You can use contraception religiously and still end up needing an abortion, ergo "contraception over abortion" doesn't make sense in a policy-discussion.

    Edit: The "it makes a lot of this controversy go away" bit should have indicated to you that you don't want to be on this guy's side, because no it fucking doesn't.
    I'm all for education about contraception. I guess that's what I took from that statement, rather than one over the other. Whoops.

    I don't think abortion should not be allowed or does not need to exist if we have better sex education. Personally I'd like to see the rates of teen pregnancy lowered (which would subsequently lower the rates of teens getting abortions, no?)

  • ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS
    edited April 2008
    Medopine wrote: »
    Medopine wrote: »
    I'm a big supporter of contraception over abortion, partly because it makes a lot of this controversy go away.

    Oh please, lets not throw that shit into the fan.

    It's pretty hard to have an abortion if you aren't pregnant.

    In fact, I might say it's impossible.

    Irrelevant. Abortion isn't analogous to contraception, they do not expressly function as substitutes for one another. Yes, contraception is great, but it doesn't inherently forgo the need for abortion. You can use contraception religiously and still end up needing an abortion, ergo "contraception over abortion" doesn't make sense in a policy-discussion.

    Edit: The "it makes a lot of this controversy go away" bit should have indicated to you that you don't want to be on this guy's side, because no it fucking doesn't.
    I'm all for education about contraception. I guess that's what I took from that statement, rather than one over the other. Whoops.

    I don't think abortion should not be allowed or does not need to exist if we have better sex education. Personally I'd like to see the rates of teen pregnancy lowered (which would subsequently lower the rates of teens getting abortions, no?)

    Ohio found an easier way to lower the rates of teen-abortions. Parental-consent law. Isn't Ohio just the bestest ever? But yeah, proper sex-ed and encouraging use of contraceptives would be good things that would help. However telling women who opt to abort "shoulda used a condom!" wouldn't. So we agree!

    DAMM
    Drunks Against Mad Mothers
  • Wonder_HippieWonder_Hippie __BANNED USERS
    edited April 2008
    I think that encouraging better sex education is the best fight we have against people who call us "abortionists." We don't want more abortions, but rather are doing everything we can so people don't need abortions. But people will still need abortions.

    Spoiler:
  • chaosbearchaosbear Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Oklahoma has a pretty fucked up legislature, but in general the public mood is shifting away from fundamentalist dogma. Most of the people I've talked with, including some very conservative, anti-abortionists types, are pretty pissed that the legislature overturned Governor Henry's veto...like "we're gonna vote those fuckers out" pissed. This really seems to be the final straw for many Oklahomans. First there was the most strict anti-immigrant law of any state passed without public debate and passed with some quite racist talk coming from our state legislators, including common usage of the term "anchor babies" to describe any child of immigrants born in this country. Next came Sally Kern's comparing of homosexuals to terrorists. Man, did those comments make this state look awesome. And now this.

    The fact is, the legislature stopped being the embarrassing family member you wish would go away and has become the racist fuck in your family that you really wish someone would shoot in the back of the head with a shotgun. A lot of people in this state, including a lot of republicans, are fed up with this shit. Enough pressure put on some of these fucks and I expect this law to go bye. Time to start writing more letters and make more calls.

  • LindenLinden Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    chaosbear wrote: »
    Next came Sally Kern's comparing of homosexuals to terrorists. Man, did those comments make this state look awesome. And now this.
    Spoiler:
    Spoiler:

    (Thanks to the Digital Cuttlefish)

    This is appalling. I can't see it lasting, but the mere fact that a medically unnecessary procedure is being required is shocking.

    What if this weren't a rhetorical question?
  • DarkCrawlerDarkCrawler Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Speaker wrote: »
    Kagera wrote: »
    What's with this Old Testament fetish anyway?

    I don't know.

    It's when the Jews were running around acting like Islamofacists.

    Oh yeah, and there was this one Jew who ran around trying to stop the righteous people from throwing them stones at them whores. He was probably a hippie too, with the long hair and all. And he was always running around with them twelve guys, so he was probably one of them damn ho-mo-sex-uals as well.

  • SpeakerSpeaker Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Speaker wrote: »
    Kagera wrote: »
    What's with this Old Testament fetish anyway?

    I don't know.

    It's when the Jews were running around acting like Islamofacists.

    Oh yeah, and there was this one Jew who ran around trying to stop the righteous people from throwing them stones at them whores. He was probably a hippie too, with the long hair and all. And he was always running around with them twelve guys, so he was probably one of them damn ho-mo-sex-uals as well.

    I think they call that the "New Testament."

    But I haven't read the bible cover to cover.

    Being walkers with the dawn and morning,
    Walkers with the sun and morning, we are not afraid of night,
    Nor days of gloom, nor darkness -
    Being walkers with the sun and morning.
  • DarkCrawlerDarkCrawler Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    I just read the part about sodomy being wrong and how them abortions and evolution are evil.

    Like every good Christian should do.

  • KageraKagera Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Speaker wrote: »
    Kagera wrote: »
    What's with this Old Testament fetish anyway?

    I don't know.

    It's when the Jews were running around acting like Islamofacists.

    Oh yeah, and there was this one Jew who ran around trying to stop the righteous people from throwing them stones at them whores. He was probably a hippie too, with the long hair and all. And he was always running around with them twelve guys, so he was probably one of them damn ho-mo-sex-uals as well.

    Which is why the Jewmofacists had him killed, like Mel Gibson said.

    “This is America. We’re entitled to our opinions.”
    “Wrong. This is Texas. And my opinion is the only one that counts."
  • Pants ManPants Man Registered User
    edited April 2008
    Ohio found an easier way to lower the rates of teen-abortions. Parental-consent law. Isn't Ohio just the bestest ever? But yeah, proper sex-ed and encouraging use of contraceptives would be good things that would help. However telling women who opt to abort "shoulda used a condom!" wouldn't. So we agree!

    i have no problems with parental consent laws whatsoever, teenagers are idiots and if they DO decide to have the baby, it's most likely the parents who are going to be doing most of the childrearing in the first place.

    the oklahoma law is total bullshit though, i don't like abortion but like other people have said, it's a blatant attempt to guilt trip women into not having the abortion

    "okay byron, my grandma has a right to be happy, so i give you my blessing. just... don't get her pregnant. i don't need another mom."
  • No-QuarterNo-Quarter Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Pants Man wrote: »
    Ohio found an easier way to lower the rates of teen-abortions. Parental-consent law. Isn't Ohio just the bestest ever? But yeah, proper sex-ed and encouraging use of contraceptives would be good things that would help. However telling women who opt to abort "shoulda used a condom!" wouldn't. So we agree!

    i have no problems with parental consent laws whatsoever, teenagers are idiots and if they DO decide to have the baby, it's most likely the parents who are going to be doing most of the childrearing in the first place.

    the oklahoma law is total bullshit though, i don't like abortion but like other people have said, it's a blatant attempt to guilt trip women into not having the abortion

    What about teens raped...by their parents?

  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Pants Man wrote: »
    i have no problems with parental consent laws whatsoever, teenagers are idiots and if they DO decide to have the baby, it's most likely the parents who are going to be doing most of the childrearing in the first place.
    What about cases of incest? Girls have to get the permission of the guy who raped them to have an abortion?

  • Pants ManPants Man Registered User
    edited April 2008
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Pants Man wrote: »
    i have no problems with parental consent laws whatsoever, teenagers are idiots and if they DO decide to have the baby, it's most likely the parents who are going to be doing most of the childrearing in the first place.
    What about cases of incest? Girls have to get the permission of the guy who raped them to have an abortion?

    obviously there should be an exemption in those cases. i don't know if the ohio law does or doesn't, but if it doesn't it should

    "okay byron, my grandma has a right to be happy, so i give you my blessing. just... don't get her pregnant. i don't need another mom."
  • StarcrossStarcross Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Pants Man wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Pants Man wrote: »
    i have no problems with parental consent laws whatsoever, teenagers are idiots and if they DO decide to have the baby, it's most likely the parents who are going to be doing most of the childrearing in the first place.
    What about cases of incest? Girls have to get the permission of the guy who raped them to have an abortion?

    obviously there should be an exemption in those cases. i don't know if the ohio law does or doesn't, but if it doesn't it should

    So in order to get an abortion in this case a girl should be forced to admit to the doctor that the baby is her dads? And in order to stop that being abused she'll have to prove it somehow getting a DNA test or something?

  • ForarForar #432 Already prepping for Toronto Fan Expo!Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    It's wasteful, invasive, and pretty horrifying.

    This about sums up what I wish to say on the matter.

    It's appalling and hateful at best.

    sigone.png
  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Pants Man wrote: »
    i have no problems with parental consent laws whatsoever, teenagers are idiots and if they DO decide to have the baby, it's most likely the parents who are going to be doing most of the childrearing in the first place.
    What about cases of incest? Girls have to get the permission of the guy who raped them to have an abortion?
    Easy. Just have her bring in a signed note from her father saying it's his, and then they waive the parental consent. Done.


    I also love how almost every limitation placed on abortion is placed there by groups arguing for the "sanctity of life," in which case any exceptions are just ludicrous. If the actual issue is the sanctity of life (and the implication that the fetus is a person), then why does it matter if:

    -The girl was raped
    -The girl has parental permission
    -The girl waits a week
    -The girl sees a counselor first
    -The girl has to look at an ultrasound first
    -Any other retarded limitation you can think of that still allows abortions, in general, to be performed

    Do any of the criteria above become relevant if she's looking to go out and shoot somebody? Can I murder somebody if my parents are okay with it? Can somebody murder me if my father was a rapist? Can somebody stab me to death in a dark alley if they're forced to look at a picture of me first so they understand what they're deciding to do?

    If you're actually "pro-life" (and assuming that the fetus is a person) then none of this should matter, and the only thing you should logically be pushing for is an outright ban. Anything else is just a case of trying to ban what you can, when you can, because you can and hoping that you can ban more later. Get out of my face with that half-assed, duplicitous bullshit. You want to ban abortion outright, and you don't give a shit about parental permission or "making sure the woman knows what she's doing." Nearly every single law you try to pass (or do pass) is just one step towards the outright ban you really want, in which case none of them pass constitutional muster.

    Except, maybe, laws regarding how far into a pregnancy you an abort. That have no exceptions. Because simply trying to move the "line" forward somewhat is at least logically consistent, and IIRC the law does give some sway to "viability" of the fetus. But again, there must be no exceptions...either it's a person, and has rights, or it's not and it doesn't. How it was conceived or whether mom and dad say it's ok has nothing to do with it.

    Spoiler:
  • Pants ManPants Man Registered User
    edited April 2008
    Starcross wrote: »
    Pants Man wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Pants Man wrote: »
    i have no problems with parental consent laws whatsoever, teenagers are idiots and if they DO decide to have the baby, it's most likely the parents who are going to be doing most of the childrearing in the first place.
    What about cases of incest? Girls have to get the permission of the guy who raped them to have an abortion?

    obviously there should be an exemption in those cases. i don't know if the ohio law does or doesn't, but if it doesn't it should

    So in order to get an abortion in this case a girl should be forced to admit to the doctor that the baby is her dads?

    yep

    of course, she could just get the abortion without doing that and let the abuse continue unabated. which is what you seem to be suggesting.

    "okay byron, my grandma has a right to be happy, so i give you my blessing. just... don't get her pregnant. i don't need another mom."
  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Pants Man wrote: »
    yep

    of course, she could just get the abortion without doing that and let the abuse continue unabated. which is what you seem to be suggesting.

    Interesting point. Though really, either situation is equally horrifying, in which case I side with individual rights. In this case, hers.

    Spoiler:
  • StarcrossStarcross Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Pants Man wrote: »
    Starcross wrote: »
    Pants Man wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Pants Man wrote: »
    i have no problems with parental consent laws whatsoever, teenagers are idiots and if they DO decide to have the baby, it's most likely the parents who are going to be doing most of the childrearing in the first place.
    What about cases of incest? Girls have to get the permission of the guy who raped them to have an abortion?

    obviously there should be an exemption in those cases. i don't know if the ohio law does or doesn't, but if it doesn't it should

    So in order to get an abortion in this case a girl should be forced to admit to the doctor that the baby is her dads?

    yep

    of course, she could just get the abortion without doing that and let the abuse continue unabated. which is what you seem to be suggesting.

    I'd rather she did that than not get the abortion and let the abuse continue unabated which seems a very likely scenario with the rules you're suggesting.

  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Starcross wrote: »
    Pants Man wrote: »
    Starcross wrote: »
    Pants Man wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Pants Man wrote: »
    i have no problems with parental consent laws whatsoever, teenagers are idiots and if they DO decide to have the baby, it's most likely the parents who are going to be doing most of the childrearing in the first place.
    What about cases of incest? Girls have to get the permission of the guy who raped them to have an abortion?
    obviously there should be an exemption in those cases. i don't know if the ohio law does or doesn't, but if it doesn't it should
    So in order to get an abortion in this case a girl should be forced to admit to the doctor that the baby is her dads?
    yep

    of course, she could just get the abortion without doing that and let the abuse continue unabated. which is what you seem to be suggesting.
    I'd rather she did that than not get the abortion and let the abuse continue unabated which seems a very likely scenario with the rules you're suggesting.
    Also, I'm sure a teenage girl needing an abortion would never lie about something like that, right? Just in order to get one?

    Plus, I'm sure she wouldn't turn to back-alley means in order to get rid of the baby without having to admit that it's her father's, right?

  • ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS
    edited April 2008
    Pants Man wrote: »
    Ohio found an easier way to lower the rates of teen-abortions. Parental-consent law. Isn't Ohio just the bestest ever? But yeah, proper sex-ed and encouraging use of contraceptives would be good things that would help. However telling women who opt to abort "shoulda used a condom!" wouldn't. So we agree!

    i have no problems with parental consent laws whatsoever, teenagers are idiots and if they DO decide to have the baby, it's most likely the parents who are going to be doing most of the childrearing in the first place.

    And if there were no such things as abusive parents you wouldn't be a bad person for supporting parental consent laws. Sadly this is not the case.

    DAMM
    Drunks Against Mad Mothers
  • Pants ManPants Man Registered User
    edited April 2008
    Starcross wrote: »
    I'd rather she did that than not get the abortion and let the abuse continue unabated which seems a very likely scenario with the rules you're suggesting.

    well, if she ends up having the kid, they'd do a paternity test and the dad would be in deep shit


    there really is no good solution in this (very very rare) scenario, and to be honest, i'd rather have the girl's future in the hands of the state than in hers at that point. i dunno. i see the point to your argument, and it's not a bad one. i just think my way is better

    edit:
    And if there were no such things as abusive parents you wouldn't be a bad person for supporting parental consent laws. Sadly this is not the case.

    hahaha okay

    man you are a dick

    "okay byron, my grandma has a right to be happy, so i give you my blessing. just... don't get her pregnant. i don't need another mom."
  • Pants ManPants Man Registered User
    edited April 2008
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Also, I'm sure a teenage girl needing an abortion would never lie about something like that, right? Just in order to get one?

    Plus, I'm sure she wouldn't turn to back-alley means in order to get rid of the baby without having to admit that it's her father's, right?

    A: what do you care, you want free abortions anyway plus they'd have to report it if she did

    and

    B: teenagers do that anyway to avoid having a legit abortion already

    "okay byron, my grandma has a right to be happy, so i give you my blessing. just... don't get her pregnant. i don't need another mom."
  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Pants Man wrote: »
    Starcross wrote: »
    I'd rather she did that than not get the abortion and let the abuse continue unabated which seems a very likely scenario with the rules you're suggesting.

    well, if she ends up having the kid, they'd do a paternity test and the dad would be in deep shit


    there really is no good solution in this (very very rare) scenario, and to be honest, i'd rather have the girl's future in the hands of the state than in hers at that point. i dunno. i see the point to your argument, and it's not a bad one. i just think my way is better

    Yes, because there are roving teams of CPS officials ensuring that the father of every teenage girl's child is properly identified. There's no chance whatsoever that she'd disappear into the general teen pregnancy statistic, without anybody giving much of a thought as to who the father was outside the context of the idle gossip of her peers.

    Spoiler:
  • StarcrossStarcross Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Pants Man wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Also, I'm sure a teenage girl needing an abortion would never lie about something like that, right? Just in order to get one?

    Plus, I'm sure she wouldn't turn to back-alley means in order to get rid of the baby without having to admit that it's her father's, right?

    A: what do you care, you want free abortions anyway plus they'd have to report it if she did

    and

    B: teenagers do that anyway to avoid having a legit abortion already

    A. I'm sure her (in this situation) innocent Dad would love that.

    and B. Just because it sometimes happens doesn't mean would should make laws actively encouraging it.

  • Pants ManPants Man Registered User
    edited April 2008
    mcdermott wrote: »
    Pants Man wrote: »
    Starcross wrote: »
    I'd rather she did that than not get the abortion and let the abuse continue unabated which seems a very likely scenario with the rules you're suggesting.

    well, if she ends up having the kid, they'd do a paternity test and the dad would be in deep shit


    there really is no good solution in this (very very rare) scenario, and to be honest, i'd rather have the girl's future in the hands of the state than in hers at that point. i dunno. i see the point to your argument, and it's not a bad one. i just think my way is better

    Yes, because there are roving teams of CPS officials ensuring that the father of every teenage girl's child is properly identified. There's no chance whatsoever that she'd disappear into the general teen pregnancy statistic, without anybody giving much of a thought as to who the father was outside the context of the idle gossip of her peers.

    oh for fuck's sake. there are a thousand different scenarios you could construct. fine. i get it.

    but hey, let's let kids have all the abortions they want without having to inform anyone because there's no possible way that could cause problems either, right? should i come up with a thousand very unlikely yet technically possible nightmare scenarios to rebut "free abortions for all"?

    "okay byron, my grandma has a right to be happy, so i give you my blessing. just... don't get her pregnant. i don't need another mom."
  • No-QuarterNo-Quarter Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Pants Man wrote: »
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Also, I'm sure a teenage girl needing an abortion would never lie about something like that, right? Just in order to get one?

    Plus, I'm sure she wouldn't turn to back-alley means in order to get rid of the baby without having to admit that it's her father's, right?

    B: teenagers do that anyway to avoid having a legit abortion already

    Define "legit" abortion. You mean one conducted by medical professionals in a safe, confidential, and clean environment? Or "legit" as in one where they have to jump through multifarious humiliating and invasive hoops to get the damn thing done, because knee-jerk retards can't mind their own fucking business, or are just trying to shore up votes from their equaling knee-jerk and retarded constituency?

  • StarcrossStarcross Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Pants Man wrote: »
    mcdermott wrote: »
    Pants Man wrote: »
    Starcross wrote: »
    I'd rather she did that than not get the abortion and let the abuse continue unabated which seems a very likely scenario with the rules you're suggesting.

    well, if she ends up having the kid, they'd do a paternity test and the dad would be in deep shit


    there really is no good solution in this (very very rare) scenario, and to be honest, i'd rather have the girl's future in the hands of the state than in hers at that point. i dunno. i see the point to your argument, and it's not a bad one. i just think my way is better

    Yes, because there are roving teams of CPS officials ensuring that the father of every teenage girl's child is properly identified. There's no chance whatsoever that she'd disappear into the general teen pregnancy statistic, without anybody giving much of a thought as to who the father was outside the context of the idle gossip of her peers.

    oh for fuck's sake. there are a thousand different scenarios you could construct. fine. i get it.

    but hey, let's let kids have all the abortions they want without having to inform anyone because there's no possible way that could cause problems either, right? should i come up with a thousand very unlikely yet technically possible nightmare scenarios to rebut "free abortions for all"?

    Do it. I want to see what horrible situations parental consent laws are protecting us from.

  • No-QuarterNo-Quarter Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Starcross wrote: »
    Pants Man wrote: »
    mcdermott wrote: »
    Pants Man wrote: »
    Starcross wrote: »
    I'd rather she did that than not get the abortion and let the abuse continue unabated which seems a very likely scenario with the rules you're suggesting.

    well, if she ends up having the kid, they'd do a paternity test and the dad would be in deep shit


    there really is no good solution in this (very very rare) scenario, and to be honest, i'd rather have the girl's future in the hands of the state than in hers at that point. i dunno. i see the point to your argument, and it's not a bad one. i just think my way is better

    Yes, because there are roving teams of CPS officials ensuring that the father of every teenage girl's child is properly identified. There's no chance whatsoever that she'd disappear into the general teen pregnancy statistic, without anybody giving much of a thought as to who the father was outside the context of the idle gossip of her peers.

    oh for fuck's sake. there are a thousand different scenarios you could construct. fine. i get it.

    but hey, let's let kids have all the abortions they want without having to inform anyone because there's no possible way that could cause problems either, right? should i come up with a thousand very unlikely yet technically possible nightmare scenarios to rebut "free abortions for all"?

    Do it. I want to see what horrible situations parental consent laws are protecting us from.

    Parental consent also functions under the notion that all parents are responsible, intelligent, reasonable, and caring. Which sadly isn't the case.

  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Starcross wrote: »
    Pants Man wrote: »
    oh for fuck's sake. there are a thousand different scenarios you could construct. fine. i get it.

    but hey, let's let kids have all the abortions they want without having to inform anyone because there's no possible way that could cause problems either, right? should i come up with a thousand very unlikely yet technically possible nightmare scenarios to rebut "free abortions for all"?

    Do it. I want to see what horrible situations parental consent laws are protecting us from.

    Me too. Keeping in mind that given two equally horrible possibilities, I choose individual freedom as the default choice.

    Also, who's arguing that they should be free?

    Spoiler:
  • Pants ManPants Man Registered User
    edited April 2008
    Starcross wrote: »
    Do it. I want to see what horrible situations parental consent laws are protecting us from.

    there aren't any, that's my point

    there are reasons to have these laws. there are not any crazy horrifying situations that will realistically happen on any regular basis if we don't have them. teenagers will not begin to use abortions as their primary means of birth control. STD rates won't skyrocket out of control. a giant population of teenagers with fucked up uteruses won't spring up overnight.

    but it's somehow plausible, so i guess it's fodder for this conversation

    "okay byron, my grandma has a right to be happy, so i give you my blessing. just... don't get her pregnant. i don't need another mom."
  • StarcrossStarcross Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Pants Man wrote: »
    Starcross wrote: »
    Do it. I want to see what horrible situations parental consent laws are protecting us from.

    there aren't any, that's my point

    there are reasons to have these laws. there are not any crazy horrifying situations that will realistically happen on any regular basis if we don't have them. teenagers will not begin to use abortions as their primary means of birth control. STD rates won't skyrocket out of control. a giant population of teenagers with fucked up uteruses won't spring up overnight.

    but it's somehow plausible, so i guess it's fodder for this conversation

    I thought you were in favour of parental consent laws. Now you're claiming that they don't protect us from anything and that nothing bad will happen if we don't have them. Exactly what point are you trying to make here?

  • iTunesIsEviliTunesIsEvil Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Pants Man wrote: »
    but hey, let's let kids have all the abortions they want without having to inform anyone because there's no possible way that could cause problems either, right?
    Tell me this is angry sarcasm. Please.

    Because there are no goddamn teenagers out there going "OH HELLZ YEAH! This 'free abortions for all, no limit on how many we hand out' thing is AWESOME. I can't wait to be physically and mentally scarred by these surgical tools! Now where's some pot and booze so my underage ass can get all fuckered up!"

Sign In or Register to comment.