It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


POLITICS: Teen Abortion Bill Could Have Big Impact

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 02:10 PM
While its impact would effect only a small number of teenagers who get abortions, the possible passage of a parental notification bill in the U.S. Congress may set the stage for several battles. Supporters of the bill say that by outlawing a minor from crossing a state line to get an abortion in a state that does not require permission will protect the girl from a potential abusive relationship. Opponent point to the fact that it would criminalize the assistance of the adult that the teenager turned to for help, be it an Aunt, or other relative. The bill called the Child Custody Protection Act, has passed the House several times, but always failed in the Senate. It is now considered a GOP top 10 initiative and is expected to pass this year.
NEW YORK - The abortion bill most likely to become federal law this year would affect a relatively small number of pregnant teens, yet its impact on them could be dramatic — sharply reducing the options for girls in many states who dread telling their parents of their plight.

Supporters and opponents each offer vivid worst-case scenarios in debating the bill, which was included this week in the Senate Republicans' priority list. It would outlaw transporting a minor across state lines to obtain an abortion in order to evade parental consent or notification laws in the girl's home state.

The bill's advocates evoke the image of a girl being impregnated by an abusive older man who then drives them to an out-of-state abortion clinic so the girl's parents and the authorities won't find out about a relationship that might have been illegal because of age differences.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

Conservative right wing groups are already on thier abortion offensive. They have already tried to warn the Democrats that a filibuster on this issue will cost them politically. In addition the Democrats are rethinking the entire abortion plank in thier platform as well. This represent a concerted effort by the "right to life" groups (funny, these right to lifers, are the only side that act like terrorist using snipers and bombs) to chip away as they wait for a change in the Supreme Court that can overturn abortion rights. No doubt if victorious they will not stop there but continue thier dogmatic attack at the state level.

posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 02:32 PM
Who let the fundamentalists out of the trailer park? Really can you all please just let us live our lives. If you think abortions are wrong don't get them. I know it's a difficult concept, letting people have free will. Do fundamentalists even read the new testament or was jesus too liberal.

posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 03:19 PM

Originally posted by astral_ice
Who let the fundamentalists out of the trailer park? Really can you all please just let us live our lives. If you think abortions are wrong don't get them. I know it's a difficult concept, letting people have free will. Do fundamentalists even read the new testament or was jesus too liberal.

Where shall we start?

Not all fundamentalists live in trailer parks? Nah, that's too obvious.
Not everyone that opposes this law is a fundy? Once again, too obvious.
New testament? I don't remember it talking about abortions, do you?
Free will? Now we're getting closer. When you figure that part out, come back in.

posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 03:31 PM
Yes well I am 100% pure PRO CHOICE. People die everyday from car crashes but we arent banning cars. Lets just let people decide for themselves please. It is their own soul they are destroying not ours. As long as there are those of us who will be there to let them know the spiritual consequences I think we should just leave it alone.

posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 04:09 PM
Well I don't know what to said, teens impregnated by family members is something more common than most think or believe.

While I was a teacher in the middle school i used to work at, we have in two years 3 girls, from 12 to 14 that got impregnated by, a grandfather and the other two by an uncle.

The girls disappeared from the school after the events and we don't know if they had abortions or not.

Now 1 of them made it to the news but the other 2 we never heard anything about it.

Now these were by family members, we have a higher incident on girls pregnant by boyfriends the state provides for girls after birth the choice to go back to regular school or to enter another alternative school for teens that had babies in which they can take care of the child while in school.

Any way to see this situation bring to mind that any girl that gets pregnant by a family member is rape and abuse and nothing else, and the girl may want to have the choice to terminate a pregnacy like that without family intervention.

posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 04:31 PM
Hopefully its all academic and simply political granstanding to throw a bone to the ultra right. This law woul dspecificaly interfere with ones ability to travel from state to stae unimpeded. That the last time I looked was unconstitutional.

posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 05:07 PM
This highlights the state's rights versus federal enforcement fight currently being waged regarding abortion.

The current situation:

Thirty-two states have parental-involvement laws in force, though the National Right to Life Committee considers eight of the laws ineffectual because of loopholes.

In all 32 states except Utah, a procedure called judicial bypass allows a minor to petition a judge for permission to get an abortion without telling her parents. In many courts, these waivers are granted routinely to any reasonably mature girl who asks; elsewhere the requests often are denied, prompting some girls to opt for an abortion in another state without a parental involvement law.

One may think it would be enough to appease the supposed "parent's rights advocates" to make it illegal in your own state for a pregnant teen to make reproductive decisions without the difficult task of going before a judge. But the fact it may be legal a couple hundred miles away "erodes" those parent's authority according to them.

Thus the desire to ban crossing state lines to where that "child" may be considered an autonomous adult in the matter. The argument that it protects the girl from "abusive relationships" would have more validity if a girl of 16 or 17 were allowed to drive herself across state lines. But this wording does not even allow that. It presumes a girl as old as 17 that may even be in college can't drive or possibly decide she doesn't want to carry a child to term without the presence of "an abusive relationship."

Quite an assumption. Only a distraught, abused, crazy person would ever want an abortion, right?
Let's protect them from themsleves shall we?

Like Alabama does? I fear this is the new model for the federal law.

Abortion-rights advocates cite Alabama — where consent of one parent is required before a minor's abortion — as a state with notable roadblocks for girls seeking a court waiver.

Jennifer Dalven of the ACLU's Reproductive Freedom Project said judges in Birmingham and some other Alabama communities oppose waivers so adamantly that legal aid attorneys now advise pregnant minors not to bother requesting one. Instead, Dalven said, girls are counseled to consider getting an abortion in Georgia or Florida, where procedures are somewhat more flexible.

"Judges in Alabama call teens who seek abortion murderers, force them to sit through religious programming, and still deny their petitions," Dalven said. "For these teens, going out of state is their only option. ... It's been a critical safety valve that would be lost if this bill is passed."

Can you imagine this even goes on in the American judicial system, not to mention they want to export this southern red state mentality and impose it on you?

Why do the anti-choice people even torture us with all this nuanced, manufactured, piece by piece, day in and day out crap. Quit dilly dallying. You want it all criminalized. All of it! Show your hand you side-stepping civil liberties nibblers. These half baked measures to outlaw some abortions, or make some harder by definition mean you're acknowledging the legality of others. By default then you're acting in opposition to your own beliefs or engaged in a rather disturbing form of political insincerity praying the slippery slope will erode to your benefit down the road. Why lie about it? God hates your luke warm faith.

[edit on 29-1-2005 by RANT]

posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 05:51 PM
Stupid baby killers. I hope all abortion is one day illegal. Poor kids. Never had a chance at life and got killed just because they werent born yet. So sad

posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 06:09 PM
Errr, last I checked, when a woman gets an abortion, she is just aborting a fetus/group of cells (been a while since I did Biology). This fetus has no real conscience or feelings. If my mother had decided to abort me as a fetus, I wouldn't even know about it, but then again, being Agnostic/Athiest, I have a different belief system than these religous fanatics.

It seems most of these religious fanatics (mainly from the big-three may I add) want us to go back to the stone age, where men rule over women, etc. Get over yourselves and pick up a book other than the Bible/Qu'ran/Torah, it'll do GREAT for those brain cells.

Now to prepare for the flaming from the religous fanatics

posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 07:25 PM

Originally posted by Croat56
Stupid baby killers. I hope all abortion is one day illegal. Poor kids. Never had a chance at life and got killed just because they werent born yet. So sad

Dogma alert, dogma alert: By your logic, we should also lock up Oncology DOctors? Why they too target rapidly dividing cells. :shk:

top topics


log in