You explain it to me, because I don't understand

[RKMBrown]

Daily Kos: You won't believe this new abortion decision, or who decided it.

If a 16 y/o isn't mature enough to make her own decisions regarding family planning, then how on earth is she mature enough to parent.

As is undoubtedly typical in such cases, the only testimony we have to review is that of petitioner. She will turn 17 years old in October 2013 and is unemancipated. She testified that she mostly raised her younger siblings because her parents “were never around.” Petitioner will be a senior in high school and plans to graduate early—in December—but she did not adduce any evidence about the grades that she has received. She wants to move out of her foster parents’ house after she graduates and has saved enough money to live on her own. Petitioner has not lived on her own, and she is dependent upon her foster parents for financial support. She plans to attend college, either in December or after working for “a little bit.” Petitioner did not testify about any work experience. “‘Experience, perspective and judgment are often lacking in unemancipated minors who are wholly dependent and have never lived away from home or had any significant employment experience.’” We find that to be true in this case.

Petitioner has engaged in counseling regarding abortion. She first testified that she had been to counseling three times, then said that she had five sessions, and later testified that she “went three times at, um, one center and then went once at another and then had two on the phone.” Petitioner’s attorney clarified that petitioner had six sessions where she either had counseling or a medical procedure. She has had three ultrasounds and has heard the unborn child’s heartbeat. She understands that an abortion would “kill the [unborn] child inside [of her].” Petitioner testified that someone discussed the risks associated with terminating a pregnancy, including bleeding and a possibility of death, but petitioner did not otherwise expound on the substance of the counseling. Nor did she elaborate on a discussion she had with a cousin’s mother. She presented no evidence regarding her understanding of the emotional and psychological consequences of abortion or of the immediate and long-range implications of the procedure.

Upon our de novo review, we conclude that petitioner has failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that she is sufficiently mature and well informed.

I am hereby implementing the TK rule, whereby I inform you ahead of any possible debate that I will not respond to your posts if I find you have either a) not read the article in its entirety, or b) you're just verbally vomiting what you say in every abortion thread you've ever encountered.

I'm gonna guess that you don't understand the citation, cause I don't read anything like what your title and the daily kos title indicate.

 

[Noomi]

You don't know that. She does not have to keep the child. The parents may want it. It can be adopted, the father could take it, she could visit on weekends, etc. She only has to obey a few months. The father is on the hook for 22 years of support. He may be loaded.

She has no clue how to not get pregnant if she didn't want a child. Had no self control & did not obey. She will be inconvenienced a few months for being stupid.

Of course, having sex is 'stupid' and its only an 'inconvenience' that she will have to suffer through the agony of childbirth, and suffer the aftereffects of childbirth for the rest of her life. Never mind that there is a risk of serious injury or death to her, but lets not worry about that, shall we?

If she drove drunk and killed someone you wouldn't have a problem with her having to deal with the consequences. If she stole something you would be saying she needs to understand that actions have consequences. Fuck, if she called a black person a derogatory word you you would be arguing that she needs to understand that just because she can say it doesn't mean she should. Why the fuck should having sex be the only human activity that does not carry a negative consequence if you do it stupidly?

If you are drunk and seriously injure a person, are you forced to donate a kidney, or donate blood? Why is this girl being forced to use her body to sustain a life when the drunk driver does not? The consequences are hardly the same, are they?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Of course, having sex is 'stupid' and its only an 'inconvenience' that she will have to suffer through the agony of childbirth, and suffer the aftereffects of childbirth for the rest of her life. Never mind that there is a risk of serious injury or death to her, but lets not worry about that, shall we?

If she drove drunk and killed someone you wouldn't have a problem with her having to deal with the consequences. If she stole something you would be saying she needs to understand that actions have consequences. Fuck, if she called a black person a derogatory word you you would be arguing that she needs to understand that just because she can say it doesn't mean she should. Why the fuck should having sex be the only human activity that does not carry a negative consequence if you do it stupidly?

If you are drunk and seriously injure a person, are you forced to donate a kidney, or donate blood? Why is this girl being forced to use her body to sustain a life when the drunk driver does not? The consequences are hardly the same, are they?

Are you loosing it?

She isn't being forced to do anything, she just can't pretend she is independent when it is convenient, and then still force her foster parents to support her.

 

[Unkotare]

You can pass judgment all day, every day. .

Not me you need to worry about judging you........

Nor anyone else.

That's up to you to figure out.

 

[Noomi]

If she drove drunk and killed someone you wouldn't have a problem with her having to deal with the consequences. If she stole something you would be saying she needs to understand that actions have consequences. Fuck, if she called a black person a derogatory word you you would be arguing that she needs to understand that just because she can say it doesn't mean she should. Why the fuck should having sex be the only human activity that does not carry a negative consequence if you do it stupidly?

If you are drunk and seriously injure a person, are you forced to donate a kidney, or donate blood? Why is this girl being forced to use her body to sustain a life when the drunk driver does not? The consequences are hardly the same, are they?

Are you loosing it?

She isn't being forced to do anything, she just can't pretend she is independent when it is convenient, and then still force her foster parents to support her.

She is being forced to carry a fetus to term.

 

[theHawk]

If you are drunk and seriously injure a person, are you forced to donate a kidney, or donate blood? Why is this girl being forced to use her body to sustain a life when the drunk driver does not? The consequences are hardly the same, are they?

Are you loosing it?

She isn't being forced to do anything, she just can't pretend she is independent when it is convenient, and then still force her foster parents to support her.

She is being forced to carry a fetus to term.

As a consequence of her own actions. Cry me a river.

And by the way its HER fetus, not just "a" fetus. You act as though she is caring someone else's child against her own will.

 

[Unkotare]

If you are drunk and seriously injure a person, are you forced to donate a kidney, or donate blood? Why is this girl being forced to use her body to sustain a life when the drunk driver does not? The consequences are hardly the same, are they?

Are you loosing it?

She isn't being forced to do anything, she just can't pretend she is independent when it is convenient, and then still force her foster parents to support her.

She is being forced to carry a fetus to term.

Do you agree with Good Samaritan laws that include a duty to assist?

 

[Kondor3]

If she's stuck carrying the baby to term, then she can give-up the child for adoption, and need not worry about her parenting skills...

 

[Pogo]

Are you loosing it?

She isn't being forced to do anything, she just can't pretend she is independent when it is convenient, and then still force her foster parents to support her.

She is being forced to carry a fetus to term.

As a consequence of her own actions. Cry me a river.

And by the way its HER fetus, not just "a" fetus. You act as though she is caring someone else's child against her own will.

I think you just made Noomi's point.

 

[Asclepias]

While I hate abortion I think its silly to argue with the right of a woman to choose to carry a child or not. I just dont see anyway a man has any say in that. Regardless if she puts the baby up for adoption or not its her body that is dealing with carrying the child until its born. In this case its really stupid to bring a child into the world that the mother doesn't really want.

 

[Vox]

leftard childless feminist idiots ( a.k.a. Noomi) are all over themselves - calling carrying pregnancy a "torture"

Clearly, hormones are clowding her brain function - go get laid finally and let it go

 

[Vox]

If you are drunk and seriously injure a person, are you forced to donate a kidney, or donate blood? Why is this girl being forced to use her body to sustain a life when the drunk driver does not? The consequences are hardly the same, are they?

Are you loosing it?

She isn't being forced to do anything, she just can't pretend she is independent when it is convenient, and then still force her foster parents to support her.

She is being forced to carry a fetus to term.

so? that's the obvious conclusion of her own actions. deal with it.

 

[Vox]

While I hate abortion I think its silly to argue with the right of a woman to choose to carry a child or not. I just dont see anyway a man has any say in that. Regardless if she puts the baby up for adoption or not its her body that is dealing with carrying the child until its born. In this case its really stupid to bring a child into the world that the mother doesn't really want.

If the man has a say for 18 years if she chooses to carry to a term - he obviously SHOULD have a definite say in the option of a "choice" to murder a baby.

 

[Asclepias]

While I hate abortion I think its silly to argue with the right of a woman to choose to carry a child or not. I just dont see anyway a man has any say in that. Regardless if she puts the baby up for adoption or not its her body that is dealing with carrying the child until its born. In this case its really stupid to bring a child into the world that the mother doesn't really want.

If the man has a say for 18 years if she chooses to carry to a term - he obviously SHOULD have a definite say in the option of a "choice" to murder a baby.

He does have a say. He shouldnt have sex. At no point does the child enter his body so you cant compare the 2.

 

[Unkotare]

While I hate abortion I think its silly to argue with the right of a woman to choose to carry a child or not. I just dont see anyway a man has any say in that. Regardless if she puts the baby up for adoption or not its her body that is dealing with carrying the child until its born. In this case its really stupid to bring a child into the world that the mother doesn't really want.

This kind of callous, immoral, inhuman attitude is what results from the leftist agenda of dehumanization.

 

[j-mac]

]He does have a say. He shouldnt have sex.

And how does that reasoning not apply equally to the girl?

 

[BDBoop]

leftard childless feminist idiots ( a.k.a. Noomi) are all over themselves - calling carrying pregnancy a "torture"

Clearly, hormones are clowding her brain function - go get laid finally and let it go

You know how I know you're a prick? Because your post proved it.

 

[BDBoop]

While I hate abortion I think its silly to argue with the right of a woman to choose to carry a child or not. I just dont see anyway a man has any say in that. Regardless if she puts the baby up for adoption or not its her body that is dealing with carrying the child until its born. In this case its really stupid to bring a child into the world that the mother doesn't really want.

Yes, well that point generally escapes people who have elevated a fetus to god-like status.

However, the fact that WIC has been halted by the shutdown? Too bad, so sad. We don't need to feed them once they get here! We only need them to make it through pregnancy!!

 

[Asclepias]

]He does have a say. He shouldnt have sex.

And how does that reasoning not apply equally to the girl?

Because she actually has to carry the child in her body. The man is relieved of that part of the situation always.

 

[Asclepias]

While I hate abortion I think its silly to argue with the right of a woman to choose to carry a child or not. I just dont see anyway a man has any say in that. Regardless if she puts the baby up for adoption or not its her body that is dealing with carrying the child until its born. In this case its really stupid to bring a child into the world that the mother doesn't really want.

This kind of callous, immoral, inhuman attitude is what results from the leftist agenda of dehumanization.

Its not callous or immoral. I just dont have the right to tell a woman what to do with her body. If women carried the baby to term in a back pack she could pass off to the man then i would have some say in it.