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.


12-year-old raped by relative can have abortion without parents’ consent, Alabama court rules

page: 10
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 24 2017 @ 11:20 PM

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: Tempter
Did the baby commit a crine? Why must it be murdered?

Can't the State pay to raise it? Oh, it seems they don't WANT to and are allowing the abortion. How convenient for them.

It's not a baby yet. But the father did implant it illegally in this poor girl without her consent and so therefor she shouldn't have to deal with it if she doesn't want to.

The state could pay to raise it, but that wouldn't solve the problem of forcing this poor innocent girl to carry it and bring it to term and birth it however.

So it's the girls misfortune then. I'm sorry it happened to her, but that shouldn't infringe on the life struggling to survive inside her.

I don't see the connection.

posted on Jul, 24 2017 @ 11:32 PM

originally posted by: Tempter

So it's the girls misfortune then. I'm sorry it happened to her, but that shouldn't infringe on the life struggling to survive inside her.

Ummm....I don't think you're sorry for her at all actually. I mean it's easy to say that and expect people to believe you, but words are cheap and people use them without meaning all the time.

That life inside her as you put it is the result of a horrific violation on this girls body of which should never ever have happened.

If I stuck a seed inside you after beating you into submission and violating you sexually, which would grow for months causing your body to change and hurt while it grew inside you until one day it pushed it's way out in an extremely painful process. All of which was both illegal and against your will. I sort of doubt you'd tell yourself, "Well, too bad for me, but this thing inside me deserves a chance to live."

No. I'm pretty sure you'd want that damn thing out of you as soon as possible and would have some pretty serious issues in dealing with it afterward too.

But you keep telling yourself that you feel sorry for her. Maybe one day you actually will when you say it.

posted on Jul, 25 2017 @ 01:23 AM
A 12-year-old incest victim doesn't want to carry to term and a bunch of self-righteous ###### tried to make the court force her to.

Those people are no better than beasts masquerading as saints.

posted on Jul, 25 2017 @ 01:27 AM
let me guess - the wingnuts demanding this [ no abortions for rape victims ] :

are religiously motivated ? - am i right ????

posted on Jul, 25 2017 @ 02:22 AM

originally posted by: eletheia

originally posted by: LungFuMoShi

If David Grimes the abortion guy, who is elderly...if he says it then it must be true.

*Dr* David Grimes has had 4 decades of actual hands on experience in

obstetrics and gynecology and is currently clinical professor at the university of

North Carolina School of Medicine.

I think his opinions are more qualified and valid than any of yours?

Naturally, he comes from a place without bias.

Like you?

Are you trying to change my mind?

Wouldn't dream of it .... I recognise when a door is shut!!

I'm not trying to change yours.

You dont have enough experience for that!

That what you just posted is meaningless to me.

As are most things I imagine

Because we all know elderly people can't be wrong...but i bet you a billion dollars that if I cared enough I could find an elderly doctor who completely contradicts the views of Mr Grimes. You'd probably completely ignore that, too, just just you ignored the fact that you failed to read all of my posts before your emotional outburst, earlier.

It seems if you followed the posts that I knew more about your posts than

you did.

It still doesn't mean anything to me...or you, I can admit can not. Apparently you have checked and verified the credibility of this person over everyone else in his field who might disagree with him. You know everything about him and how righteous and credible he is. Me? I've never even met the dude...reading about what he said, where he studied, where he works etc means just as much to me as his opinion itself...I need to take it on face value and cannot verify a single thing. You obviously know the guy in person and trust him very much.

Every expert who is employed and tasked with telling you and me how important something is has their own bias and agenda.

You're absolutely lright, I am biased...and I gather from that comment that you acknowledge that your Dr friend is, too. In fact he has more invested in abortion than I ever will.

Regardless...people like you and me are required to take what we're told by these experts on face I said, and you casually ignored - I can probably waste time finding a reputable Dr who says the exact opposite of Mr Grimes.

But, naturally...Mr Grimes would have more cred in your eyes...because he's spouting an opinion that is in line with yours...because you have bias, too.

Don't we all?
edit on 25/7/2017 by LungFuMoShi because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 25 2017 @ 02:31 AM
Aaaanyway...Dr Grimes, aside...

You still failed to address the point that...just because someone is stupid enough to perform a surgical procedure on themselves doesn't mean we should mete out that surgical procedure, willy nilly.

You seem to think that, because stupid people in the past tried to perform abortions on themselves - that it somehow validates abortion.

If a bunch of people decide to inject silicone into their backside to make it bigger, should people get bum jobs on demand to prevent the problems self-cosmetic surgery causes?

You're actually very selective on the points you address...but we've gone over that, already. I fully expect that from you, sometimes we have to ignore or fail to address the points that don't quite confirm our own bias. It's funny how you talk like I have a problem because I come from my place of bias, which I can fully admit...yet you continually fail to address your own or answer any points that clearly identify it.

I mean, it's not hard to figure out who is being dishonest or deceptive, here.
edit on 25/7/2017 by LungFuMoShi because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 25 2017 @ 03:38 AM
a reply to: dawnstar

12-year-old raped by relative can have abortion without parents’ consent, Alabama court rules.

Another case of the state exercising its control over the child and showing whose boss.

posted on Jul, 25 2017 @ 04:36 AM
a reply to: Azureblue

how EXACTLY befefits from forcing a child to give birth to her rapists child ?

posted on Jul, 25 2017 @ 06:39 AM
a reply to: dawnstar

I completely agree with both the courts final ruling, allowing this abortion to go ahead, and with your position on the matter, dawnstar.

That any question was ever raised, by anyone, as to the legitimacy of this procedure, is testament to the utterly mindless penetration of lawmaking, by religious doctrine. I cannot stress this enough, religion has no place in politics, or law. It must not effect law, either its outworking or its creation in the first place. I say this despite being a man of faith, because I know that religion as an organisation is not the pure thing that a personal faith can be, should not be permitted to have its head in society, and run roughshod over the physical realities with which we are presented.

Be it parents refusing to allow their children to transition from one sex to another out of dedication to a cause not shared by their offspring, with the result that their child ends their life through frustration, or be it sexually abused children being forced to go through a gauntlet of stressful legal proceedings, just to edit the results of the sins of some monster out of their life in some way, the effects of a theocratic penetration into law and governance are NEVER positive, and must be prevented at all costs. While I congratulate the judiciary of Alabama for their prudent and wise decision on this occasion, the fact that they ever had to rule on this at all, is an indicator that something has gone seriously wrong with the separation of Church and state element of the constitution.

posted on Jul, 25 2017 @ 07:00 AM
a reply to: RainbowPhoenix

posted on Jul, 25 2017 @ 09:07 AM
a reply to: Tempter

and, there's no concern as the infringement the fetus imposes on the 12 year old child??
if we have two children on the playground fighting to the point where we worry about serious harm coming to one of them.... we separate them, don't we??
but..... we can't separate these two, can we, they seem to be one body hosting another inside her, utilizing the nutrients that she needs to grow, affecting a uterus that may not be developed enough to carry it, the girl is being infringe on also, and quite possibly is a threat to her life!!

12 year old kids are usually not developed enough to carry a child to full term without suffering some major health problems!!

posted on Jul, 25 2017 @ 09:25 AM
a reply to: Azureblue

oh, ya, let's make this a case for parental rights,
never mind that in this case the parents don't seem to be in the least bit fit...
never mind that when mom found out about the pregnancy, she abused the girl which was the reason why the girl was place into foster care for the fifth time..
by god, that 12 year old girl should have been able to control something that was probably way beyond her control and prevented that rape!!!

I will agree that whoever is looking after this 12 year old girl needs to have knowledge of the abortion taking place... so she can monitor the girls health and watch for any complications...
but I disagree that either the state or the parents should be allowed to prevent her from getting the abortion in any way.. heck, I lean closer to a position where she should automatically get the abortion even if she doesn't want it if the doctor says it's too dangerous, which, many probably would! but, then, I've seen the result that this causes on a person through the years mentally firsthand, so I side with...
it's the girls say that matters!!!

posted on Jul, 25 2017 @ 09:31 AM
a reply to: TrueBrit

women's lives are being placed in danger in this country now to promote a political agenda, to get politicians elected...
I'm afraid it's only a matter of time before we end up our own Savita Halappanavar story or two..

posted on Jul, 25 2017 @ 07:07 PM

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

early term abortions are safer than giving birth in the best of circumstances.. it's those that are done in later terms that pose the most danger... but by all means set up more roadblocks so that they are done later!!
you are nuts to think that it would be safer for a 12year old than giving birth!! and, quite frankly, she just might not be able to give birth again after giving birth... probably more likely!!

Again, where are your stats? Where is your evidence?? You can claim this all day long, and it still won't be true. Pregnancy is a natural thing. Abortion is not.

posted on Jul, 25 2017 @ 07:09 PM

originally posted by: LungFuMoShi
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Lol...I had a proper laugh at that guy.

You can't talk about abortion unless you do somethign about ISIS - that's what I got from that.

Dunno what he wants me to do...I don't even own a gun. Maybe I should smack their bums.

But it stands to ain't defeated ISIS you've no place discussing the morals or ethical aspects of abortion.

Bizarre argument! I wonder what will be next?

posted on Jul, 25 2017 @ 07:11 PM

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

so, who is best fit to understand all these risks, the doctor trained in medicine, or a few judges who aren't, or a bunch of politicians elected into office??
and who is best to decide which of these risks should be taken on, if not the person facing them? you want to say that the girl is unable to make an informed decision by herself, okay, are you willing to accept the decision that is made for her is for her to have an abortion she doesn't wish to have as quickly as you would accept a decision not to allow one?

Being trained in medicine does not grant someone some special ability when it comes to a moral issue. The girl is a child. She cannot fully understand all of the risks for either scenario. Hence, the need for adult involvement. Plus again, you don't consider that TWO lives are at risk here, not one.

posted on Jul, 25 2017 @ 07:15 PM
Until it's sentient and conscious, it's genetic material.

That man has wasted plenty of genetic material.

posted on Jul, 25 2017 @ 07:37 PM
Anyone that can still be considered a child, obviously doesn't need a child.

If the loons want it to live and torture her, that mega sucks.

But if they don't personally adopt the baby, they're false martyrs and deserve a worse fate for forcing women to torture themselves in the name of their own damned personal morals in a country of supposed 'free rights'. We're legalizing drugs before Abortion is done being considered immoral? Are you people insane? Where the # is Religious freedom and separation of church and state?

Sure is easy for the male counterpart with 0 pain in reproduction, in fact insane amount of endorphin, for the result of the female to merely be a destroyed vessel for the next generation. This makes thing equally pissy when adding the thought Men just date younger, and younger women and have a reputation for getting women Impregnate, then leaving them, in that state, and this itself is it's own form of trophy only for showing other men how bad you can treat women. It's almost gay(no offense gay people, straight men hate being called gay) it's so disgustingly self-infatuated and ingrained into society that women are inferior, and even without knowing it's true, men just follow suit and abuse women because they think that's their place, becoming the ultimate sheep of each other anyway.

The current infatuation with Anal sex now is disgusting that younger women think that is a normal standard because men don't want them to get impregnate, but also don't want contraception now. And when men get angry, they impregnate them on purpose as a weapon in the relationship and leave. It's like reading about Sodomy from the Bible when you take peoples rights away to control Reproduction. Somehow you people understand how Guns works, Gun Restrictions = Bad. Ultimately the exposer of contraception and women's rights will lead to people make better choices for starting families in the first place, it's obvious, this is also why drugs are being legalized. Treat people like Children, and they revolt every time. Tell they they need to be 'Responsible' and they are more likely to fawn at that idea.

That's really how things are.

posted on Jul, 25 2017 @ 08:48 PM
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

pregnancy is a natural thing, for a 12 year old???
don't think so!!!

"The placenta preferentially will take nutrition from the mother, who really is a child," said Sherry Thomas, an ob/gyn at Mission Community Hospital in Panorama City, Calif. That means that the developing fetus will leach calcium and other nutrients from a child who should still be growing herself. Likewise, pregnancy puts a major strain on the cardiovascular system, according to Wall. Pregnant women have about 50 percent more blood circulating through their bodies compared with non-pregnant women. [8 Odd Bodily Changes During Pregnancy]

The greatest danger, however, is to the pelvic floor. Girls may start ovulating and menstruating as early as age 9, though the average is around 12 to 13. (Some studies suggest that the average age of first menstruation is dropping, but the data is not conclusive.) Just because a girl can get pregnant, though, doesn't mean she can safely deliver a baby. The pelvis does not fully widen until the late teens, meaning that young girls may not be able to push the baby through the birth canal.

The results are horrific, said Wall and Thomas, who have both worked in Africa treating women in the aftermath of such labors. Girls may labor for days; many die. Their babies often don't survive labor either.

The women and girls who do survive often develop fistulas, which are holes between the vaginal wall and the rectum or bladder. When the baby's head pushes down and gets stuck, it can cut portions of the mother's soft tissue between its skull and her pelvic bones. As a result, the tissue dies, and a hole forms. Feces and urine then leak through the hole and out of the vagina. Women with fistulas are often divorced and shunned. And young girls are at higher risk.

if it was so natural, young girls wouldn't need c-sections to safely have them!!!

The maternal death rate for teens under age 15 is two and a half times greater than that of mothers aged 20 to 24.6

"Her body is clearly not defined for pregnancy with its short stature," Al-Khan said. "Her chest is not extensively developed for breast tissue, her bones aren't quite fused, and once you expose a child this young to high amounts of progesterone and especially estrogen, there is (a possibility) that it could halt her growth."

Al-Khan said other medical challenges facing a pregnant girl as young as 10 or 11 include:

— The pelvis is not defined for natural childbirth;

— The vagina could sustain injury during a natural birth;

— The patient is at high risk for preeclampsia, a pregnancy condition marked by high blood pressure and protein in the urine, and which can lead to convulsions and multi-system organ failure;

— A higher risk of pre-term labor and delivery, which would mean the baby’s size would be compromised, leaving the baby at risk for developmental issues, fetal growth restriction and chromosomal abnormalities;

— Higher incidence of stillbirth;

— Higher incidence of cholestasis of pregnancy, a condition caused by the blockage of bile, which can lead to stillbirth and placenta issues;

— A chance of developing fatty liver, which can be fatal.

"The textbooks don’t even tell you how to deal with a 10-year-old; it’s completely different even though we understand the basics," Al-Khan said.

posted on Jul, 25 2017 @ 08:59 PM
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

just how can someone's expertise in morality deem them be qualified to evaluating the medical risks involved, pray tell??
doctors are adults, mental health counselors are adults, one is qualified to ascertain the medical risks to the girl, and the other is capable of evaluating the emotional risks involved. just where do "moralists" and politicians, judges come into the picture here??
and no, there are not two lives at risk, there is one , and then there's a possibility of one!! if the living, breathing one does not survive long enough in the pregnancy, then there is no possibility for the possibility of the other to even become is there??
the right to fight tooth and nail for their right to own guns.... to protect themselves....
well, sorry, the pregnant women/girl has just as much to protect themselves.

new topics

top topics

<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in