Should 11-year-old girls have to bear their rapists' babies? Ohio says yes

[Samm]

@Jezcoe

I didn’t.

I wrote what my opinion is on the matter.

I can only speak for myself.

Yet her point obliterated yours. Go figure.

[thinkingman]

@Konssurvative1

Ideally sure, but you realize the odds both physically and psychologically stacked against the child by carrying the fetus full term.

yes. i also realize docs may recommend abortion based on health of both

but i argue there should be some effort to explore options to save the baby instead of jumping right to abortion. it is after all an innocent life

i know the genius prgressive left thinks that’s “barbaric”

[Jezcoe]

@Samm

@Jezcoe

Of course it was.

It was the point that has been made all along.

I have tried to make it as clear as possible.

Sadly it doesn’t get through.

No. That was a point we were discussing earlier. It was not the point we were discussing in that particular set of exchanges.

This has become tedious.

[carpe_diem]

I guess it depends on what you consider a Rapist first of all?

Democrat Politicians are for 11 year girls to get married to American men
under certain circumstances. I’d call those men Rapists, but then again,
I guess the Democrat Politicians don’t.

***Cause and effect. The Cause is usually Democrat Politicians allowing something to happen in the first place like a 11 year old girl to get married to any man in the USA in general. Then you’ll have the effects, and Democrat Politicians tend to always blame those effects on Republicans and Conservatives. ***

Of course this applies to more than this circumstance in general. It’s a strategic Tactic that the Democrats use in general against Republicans and Conservatives.

It’s closely related to the Projection. They Cause problems intentionally, so that later on, they can try to destroy or have ammunition to debate with against Conservative values in general.

[CaughtInTheMiddle]

These old men simply want to force other people’s 9yo girls to have a baby after being raped. That’s all this boils down to.

It’s much more of a control thing than any of them would ever admit. Not unlike old guys in the Middle East.

[JayJay]

@Samm

@pam95650

No Samm. Those were the times when back-alley abortions killed women. You think screwing around and getting pregnant is new? Unwanted pregnancies have been around forever. Safe and legal abortions make it safe for the woman.

Nobody has ever suggested that laws stop crime. Well, except for liberal gun-grabbers that is …

What crime?

[JayJay]

@Samm

@Jezcoe

@Samm

@LucyLou

The parents give the consent, Conan.

So much for Jezcoe’s autonomy argument.

How so?

We have established a standard of consent in this nation based on age

The young girl still has autonomy, is able to have an opinion about what should happen to her, can advocate for what she wants, etc.

If the parents refuse her wishes, either way, that is their parental right but I would seriously question their judgement if they go against the advice of their doctor or countermand the wishes of the child.

How did you miss the point that Lucy made that the parents of the girl have the ultimate say in what she does (unless she goes to court and sues for emancipation.) Her say in what happens can be overridden by her parents, therefore, they, not she, have autonomy over her body.

And when there is a clash of moralities there, even the child has recourse through the court system.

Parental consent has never been construed to mean complete parental autonomy over the child.

[janer]

This is an interesting dilemma because there is another thread about whether the state can intervene and demand that a minor child must be given chemotherapy against the parents’ judgment. While the specifics are different, the fundamental question is the same - assuming that the parents would permit their minor child to have the abortion (presumably in a jurisdiction that allowed it) under what circumstances can the state overrule the parents?

I would think that it would be considered a very high risk for an 11 year old to undergo pregnancy and childbirth, so I think that if the life and health of the mother are an exclusion to this law, it would apply here. But the question of how far the state may step in and overrule the parents is an interesting one.

[Paul_Thomson]

@CaughtInTheMiddle

We know. After the little girl was raped you would prefer that the little girl have the rapist’s baby.

.Google “I was raped but chose to have the baby.” It is a more healing choice for the raped woman/girl, actually.

e,g.https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrxgzM7stlc2AgASQLnHgx.;_ylu=X3oDMTBzc200aHJzBGNvbG8Dc2czBHBvcwMxMAR2dGlkAwRzZWMDc3I-/RV=2/RE=1557799612/RO=10/RU=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DP45IQUUUe0s/RK=2/RS=U97WNmBy61bIGNI1Wg8ZibYmccI-

And

https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrxgzM7stlc2AgAPgLnHgx.;_ylu=X3oDMTByajVjNzRjBGNvbG8Dc2czBHBvcwM0BHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--/RV=2/RE=1557799612/RO=10/RU=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.liveaction.org%2Fnews%2Fraped-women-who-had-their-babies-defy-pro-choice-stereotypes%2F/RK=2/RS=iU81_QHIDx89ea2DlFtwnUaQXm4-

[party-free]

@Paul_Thomson

It is a more healing choice for the raped woman/girl, actually.

That is an opinion. And it’s an opinion based on a choice, which is the crux here.

[Candyman]

1. Predominate within your description is the word “chose”. Ruminate on that for a few minutes.

2. How many of the victims in the attached links were in the ballpark of 11 years old?

[Samm]

@Jezcoe

@conan

Are you find with those that try to educate people about abortion? Showing pictures of babies through they life cycle?

Are you find with Christian right or any other faith base groups going into schools and talk about about sanctuary of life?

The sanctity of life is a philosophical concept that isn’t the property of the Christian Right.

I do think that people should know as much about biology as possible and be truthful as to what is and isn’t there during fetal development.

It could go a long way to clearing up things like making a heartbeat bill for a time before the heart has developed.

Again, the bill says “when the heartbeat is detected” not “six weeks.” Therefore, there is nothing to clear up. If the Doctor doesn’t detect a heartbeat, he can legally kill and extract the fetus regardless of how far along the pregnancy is.

[Samm]

@Jezcoe

@Samm

@Jezcoe

Of course it was.

It was the point that has been made all along.

I have tried to make it as clear as possible.

Sadly it doesn’t get through.

No. That was a point we were discussing earlier. It was not the point we were discussing in that particular set of exchanges.

This has become tedious.

I am sure you know how to fix that.

[Samm]

@JayJay

@Samm

@pam95650

No Samm. Those were the times when back-alley abortions killed women. You think screwing around and getting pregnant is new? Unwanted pregnancies have been around forever. Safe and legal abortions make it safe for the woman.

Nobody has ever suggested that laws stop crime. Well, except for liberal gun-grabbers that is …

What crime?

Any crime. Laws are what defines what is a crime, but they do not stop crime from being committed. If they did, nobody would ever be arrested for breaking the law.

[Samm]

@JayJay

@Samm

@Jezcoe

@Samm

@LucyLou

The parents give the consent, Conan.

So much for Jezcoe’s autonomy argument.

How so?

We have established a standard of consent in this nation based on age

The young girl still has autonomy, is able to have an opinion about what should happen to her, can advocate for what she wants, etc.

If the parents refuse her wishes, either way, that is their parental right but I would seriously question their judgement if they go against the advice of their doctor or countermand the wishes of the child.

How did you miss the point that Lucy made that the parents of the girl have the ultimate say in what she does (unless she goes to court and sues for emancipation.) Her say in what happens can be overridden by her parents, therefore, they, not she, have autonomy over her body.

And when there is a clash of moralities there, even the child has recourse through the court system.

Parental consent has never been construed to mean complete parental autonomy over the child.

What recourse does the unborn baby have?

[moonshine]

in my religion a fetus if not a baby. you’re trying to infringe on my religion and impose your beliefs on me.

just like Iran

[Samm]

@moonshine

in my religion a fetus is not a baby. you’re trying to infringe on my religion and impose your beliefs on me.

just like Iran

Technically, that is correct, but that is just a definition, it does not make the unborn any less human. Besides, when have you ever heard an expectant mother say “my fetus just kicked me” or a Doctor telling her “your fetus is a boy.”? No … to everyone who ever wanted the fetus to live to adulthood, it is a baby growing inside its mother.

And I call BS on your religion. There is no such religion, you are just being factious because you think it’s clever.

[pam95650]

Obtaining an abortion is NOT A CRIME.

[Samm]

@pam95650

Obtaining an abortion is NOT A CRIME.

It can be. The law is the law, and the law describes the crime, right? If an abortion is performed outside of the conditions allowed under the law, it IS A CRIME.

[Bodecea]

@Forcefield

@conan

Well that’s valid point. Either why I hope he rots in prison for many years. In fact if she does go through abortion IMO he should be charged for murder.

That makes no sense. Allow her to “murder” the “baby”, then charge him with murder?

Either abortion is exactly the same as murdering a baby or it isn’t. The fact that you think there should be an allowance for rape situations means you do not think it is the same.

Like all those con-servatives who say that Liberals should be allowed to abortion their fetus’. It’s all conditional.