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
VC does not understand the concept of "discourse". Trying to explain it is a lost cause.
Well, if you are always going to look back and a previous period of your life and say that you were immature, then it becomes impossible to pick an age at which you can be said to be able to make a mature decision. So any age limit then becomes an arbitrary point in time and can be slippery sloped to push it both forward and backward.
So 18 is generally chosen as being the point where you can reasonably expect someone to have fully developed their mental faculties to make a decision and be able to understand the consequences.
That is not to say that you can deny anyone under 18 the ability to make choices for themselves. If the current laws are able to punish minors for things they do, even going so far as to try them as adults, then it is rediculous to claim that they should be unable or not allowed to make the final decision in a choice that will change their life regardless of which decision they make.
I'm just trying to help Forar from stepping in to an unended loop, here. I don't want the thread locked down.
Well, if they didn't want to get sexually assaulted, they wouldn't have worn such revealing clothes and been going around without a male escort, acting like they're full human beings.
Invite me: XBox Live | PS3 | Steam
Link to me: Number Sorter | Achievement Generator
Thank you.
And while I agree that it becomes a very complicated situation when dealing with the very young (say around 11 years old; possibly old enough to reproduce, but not even a 'teenager' yet), people (and in this case, women in particular) have a right to choose what they feel is best for them, in mind and body.
So to be perfectly clear, no, I am not in favour of taking that choice away from women. I am in fact very much pro-choice, and it is that belief that leads me to feel this law is so vile, particularly after finding out that the vaginal ultrasound may be painful (and even if it was the least invasive procedure ever, when possibly dealing with rape victims and people under immense stress and trauma, such a blanket statement/approach becomes doubly cruel).
I prefer "they were asking for it". It not only implies that the woman is at fault, but she deserved it.
Warning: MMO Forum Joke ahead:
Forar, are you pro-choice? Wouldn't shock me. Your main is a Rogue, so I figure the "Kill it before it has a chance" is your thing
We're on the same page here.
The statement that I took issue with was the idea that the only negative consequence a teeager getting an abortion might end up dealing with is "some regret". Teenage years are difficult ones, and an abortion isn't exactly a fun activity, nor is it emotionally neutral.
I oppose parental consent laws, but I don't think we should blind ourselves to the fact that teenagers recieving abortions need some kind of support structure to make sure that they come out of the ordeal okay. Too often people jump to an extreme, and only end up hurting the folks that they claim to be helping, by denying that there are any other issues at all.
Except that we're already in agreement that it makes sense to bar people below a certain age from doing certain things without their parents consent and supervision due to requisite maturity-levels. This law isn't breaking new ground in that regard. To attack it on those grounds makes no sense because you then have to attack the age of consent, the driving age, the smoking age, the "no handgun sales under 21" thing, the parental-consent-for-tattoos bit, etc. That whole angle just doesn't even work as an approach to attacking this law. It can only function as support, if anything at all.
Drunks Against Mad Mothers
What makes the parents able to make a mature decision? The fact that it is their own child would further cloud their judgement. The mix of feelings of their child most likely going against their wishes by having sex would influence them to wanting to punish them perhaps more so than their own consideration for the best long term choice for their daughter.
When the options are, keep the child, give the child up for adoption, and abort the embryo. All 3 of these will affect their daughters development and personality for the rest of her life. Not just 18 years etc.
It is rediculous for anyone other than the daughter to be making that decision.
Good question, what makes the parents mature enough to decide to get a tattoo or have a double Johnnie Black and a cigar.
Drunks Against Mad Mothers
Well, actually, a more developed frontal lobe seems to contribute to better decision-making, especially long term ones. That's part of why most people tend to start smoking younger. It's overstated usually, but there are definite developmental milestones that it makes sense to acknowledge.
http://troublethinking.wordpress.com (Updated Wed) http://twitter.com/#!/Durandal4532
Don't forget the "wisdom" that comes with life experience.
The older you are, the more likely you are to have dealt in some way with a situation before, which lends a better insightand understanding of consequences than any ammount of academic study can give.
Alcohol being a very mild poison, tattoo's being permanent scars (in theory), and cigars containing a number of carcinogens that can contribute to developing cancer. I wouldnt classify any of those as mature decisions, regardless of how much pleasure or enjoyment might be derived from them.
That said it is not my intention or even desire to remove their ability to decide for themselves whether or not to persue them.
EDIT: To bring it back on topic, just like it is not my desire to remove from women even underaged ones the ability to decide for themselves whether or not to undergo an abortion. Quite the opposite in fact, it should always be their choice, regardless of circumstance and situation.
Sunlight is carcinogenic.
A "mature decision" isn't a judgement on the outcome, in this case, it's a judgement on the ability of the decider to make an informed and logical choice.
Point is, there are reasonable defenses for choosing some date as mental milestones. The difference between 20 and 21 year olds might be trivial, but there are some mental differences that can be pointed to that most often occur around the 21st year. The question is whether they're important, and for what.
http://troublethinking.wordpress.com (Updated Wed) http://twitter.com/#!/Durandal4532
I'm not sure how you think that answers the question. Your attempt to sling insults at people who make choices you disapprove of does not change the fact that the public consensus is that a certain level of maturity is required to be able to make those decisions responsibly. Thus we don't let people under a certain age to make those decisions for themselves.
Drunks Against Mad Mothers
You put forth no argument, nor do you refute or oppose anyone elses argument.
This also fails to answer the question. It should be very easy for you to illustrate why abortions are different from buying a bottle of scotch. If you find the prospect of having your arguments challenged so objectionable why are you posting them?
Drunks Against Mad Mothers
The choice to purchase and consume a bottle of scotch can only impact a persons entire life dependent on what other actions they take.
If I deny someone the ability to purchase a bottle of scotch, they can buy one years down the road and there is little to no consequence of them having gone without it. The same cannot be said for denyone someone an abortion.
And thus any correlation between maturity and age or lack of correlation between maturity and age is irrelevant to whether or not we allow women to decide for themselves whether they have an abortion.
Drunks Against Mad Mothers
It only impacts a persons life (and here I assume you mean the patient, not the fetus) because of the pressure and stigma society places on the act of getting an abortion. If it were like buying a bottle of Advil, which is should be, there would BE no stigma.
Exactly what I've been saying! Hooray we agree! I'm not sure which post gave you the impression that I was of the opinion that abortions should be denied to people in any circumstance.
No, it impacts their life because they will always know they either a)Could have had a child but didnt (there are numerous add on effects to this knowledge), b) had a child that they gave away that is out there in the world without them, c) they have a child they are raising right now and know the things they have given up for the child
I didn't attack your position, I challenged the validity of your argument. It's like if you tell me how you're planning to destroy a tank and I tell you the gun you're using isn't going to work and then you assume I don't think you should destroy the tank.
Drunks Against Mad Mothers
Yeah, I feel the same way when I pass up the soup for the salad at Olive Garden.
Regardless, societal pressue plays a big role in how having an abortion will make someone feel about having had an abortion.
Because we also prohibit minors from making some decisions such as alcohol, smoking, blah blah blah.
Your argument SUPPORTED parental consent, even if you weren't trying to.
Well I got confused when the crux of the original post that you apparently took issue with was:
No, it really didnt.
The bolded part is the problem, because you CAN deny anyone under 18 the ability to make choices for themselves, we do it all the time whether it be what they can buy, what they can do, or where they can go.
See how that SUPPORTS parental consent?
I agree that abortion as a procedure should be as normalized as possible in order to assuage some of that stigma and make abortions easy to get, but at the same time abortion is different from any other medical procedure, just by definition. It's a decision with far greater psychological ramifications than pretty much any other medical procedure out there, and it's (obviously) particularly hard on women. So while I hope that abortions become legal and safe and easy to get, I hope that the safeguards and support systems that should go along with abortions are never swept aside in the attempt to make abortion just another medical procedure.
Luckily they largely are!
Unless it is more similar to post-partem depression, which society says shouldnt exist and until recently didnt even accept as a valid medical condition.
Indeed, except they could be easier to get in a lot of places.
Like OKLAHOMA. Grr.
Depends where you are, and how wealthy you are.
Drunks Against Mad Mothers
But I doubt a majority of Americans would support this OK thing.
If you're going to force ladies to have kids, you'd better be willing to help pay for them.
Or, you know, the fact that they realize that they just willingly, and purposefully, snuffed out a human life. Abortion IS NOT a wonderful happy thing. It is essentially the definition of a necessary evil. It is understandable why a women would be upset after having one, and we as a society need to support these women in some way, if we want to pretend that we have any kind of compassion at all.
Not to mention that there ARE certain horomonal changes during pregnancy, and losing that pregnancy leaves the body changed for no reason, which has it's own horomonal and emotional backlash.
SOme women become depressed after bringing a healthy pregnancy to full term. There should be ZERO surprise that it occurs when the pregnancy is terminated as well. This SHOULD NOT be minimized. It ALSO should not be used as an argument against abortion, of course. It should be recognized so that society can help.
You should know by now that the anti-abortion movement does not consider itself to be forcing anyone to do anything.
Did you read the OP?
We are talking about forcing invasive ultrasounds on women getting abortions, even if BOTH the patient and doctor are opposed.