It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

NEWS: 13 Year Old Girl in Florida Granted Abortion by Courts

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 4 2005 @ 01:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Onewingeddemon
I'm pro-life, but this is an exception because she is so young.


But that's "pro-choice." Everyone I know that's pro-choice, is pro-life "with exceptions." It's the exceptions that choice is all about.

It's the ability to see those "exceptions" for what they are (their differences, their personal uniqueness and most of all their universality) in a non-self centered light that tends to make a person understand they alone can't be the judge of another's life, body or decisions.

Of course some people make bad decisions. But it's the infinite number of hypotheticals one may raise to allow for the equally infinite number of "exceptions" that exists behind the blanket ideology of "pro-choice" ...that which seeks to keep the decision making ability in the hands of the individual.

Overwhelming we understand this when it comes to free speech. We're almost all pro-free speech, even when it comes to defending that which we abhore. Does being pro-free speech then make us all racists (for example)? To preserve the good and your right's, do we not defend the right's of others to say things with which we completely disagree?

Some women I'm sure use abortion lightly, repeatedly or as a form of birth control. Whether or not that's morally wrong isn't the issue when it comes to the overwhelming number of "exceptions" for which most of us would like to allow responsible people to have a choice.

Of course this does not apply to all. Some (a very small minority) are perfectly up front and honest about their belief there should be no exceptions when it comes to abortion. Rape, incest, grave risk to life of the mother... it doesn't matter to them. Dick Cheney has voted this way previously and most of the Religious Right have expressed much the same view. And that's fine. It's actually logically consistent as is the equally ideological absolute position of "abortion on demand."

But as for all that gray area in between where most Americans stand? That's pro-choice, whether most will admit it or not. Whether your "pro-choice with exceptions" (like late term abortions) or "pro-life with exceptions" (like this case), you're still pro-choice. Again, we have no problem admitting we're pro-free speech and most would even admit they'd defend the Klan's right to spew hate if it came right down to it, but "pro-choice" is not the antithesis of "pro-life" anymore than "pro-free speech" is not the same as "racist."

Forget the politically charged wedge marketing and unravel this logic problem and you'll see what I'm saying and where most Americans stand (which is right along side you):

All pro-choice people are pro-life and most pro-life people are pro-choice.

And to help clarify my position on this case, the state is not "granting" this girl an abortion. They've decided they can't stop her from making her own decision. There's a huge difference. And Jeb Bush has conceded he has no right to intervene. That's what I call progress.


What I'd really like to see come of this case now is absolutely nothing. We have no right to ever know what the girl ultimately decides or decided to do. She was found to have rights as a free citizen of the United States of America. May they be respected.

[edit on 4-5-2005 by RANT]




posted on May, 4 2005 @ 02:17 AM
link   
Jeb is SO screwed. People talking about making him president candidate next election. No way in hell is that happening now. He lost government right to interfere in the life of a vegetable, now he lost the right to interfere in a 13 year old life, no way the religous nuts are going to want him president.



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 06:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043

The child should not be blame she is a victim of society and the system.



She is a victim of her parents....not society or the system.

And what exactly did you think the "system" would do?.... Keep her under lock and chains until she became old enough?

She is a child but she made a decision to have sex. The system has nothing to do with that. Or are we going to blame society and the system for every teenager that gets pregnant?... Oh wait, we can blame liberals for this. Sex with anyone and at any time is part of liberalism...it is taught to schoolchildren because of liberalism. So if you want to blame anyone, blame liberalism.



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 06:52 AM
link   
ya, and let's not consider....

the church was once encouraging children to be married at that age..."lest they fall to temptation.....

the midevil church was liberal!!! wow!!!

I bet you couldn't find a year in recorded history that didn't have a few kids this young getting pregnant. The only difference between then and now, is that we have the medical technology now to reduce her risk of death by offering options, one being abortion.

I do have a problem with them not allowing doctors to keep parents updated on the health of there child, though. Something like an abortion, well, that lack of knowledge could fatal later if compications came up.

[edit on 4-5-2005 by dawnstar]



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 07:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib

She is a child but she made a decision to have sex. The system has nothing to do with that. Or are we going to blame society and the system for every teenager that gets pregnant?...


Any way, she didn't got pregnat under her parents watch, she got pregnat under the "sytem" the state supervision.

They allowe a 13 year old child to run in the streets and get pregnat.

If they are not at fault then should we blame the "liberals"
oh............wait "conservative run Florida"



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 07:49 AM
link   
State supervision or NOT, dear Marg, the little girl RAN away from the state facility she was at.
Now in the appleid case, though she is under the "watch" of the state, with her running away, whose fault is it, Marg? What makes it different if she had run away from home and got pregnant? Parents fault too?

Get a grip. The only one to blame here is the girl and whoiever got her pregnant, not the state or the parents.




seekerof



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 07:57 AM
link   
Sorry Seekerof is the state fault that she was taken from her "incapable parents" and taken to a "shelter" and let her "run away" and get "rape" because after all she is only 13 years old.

See under our laws sex with a 13 year old is "rape"

The "system" was out there to "protect her" it fail, so the question is how many children are taken from their parents custody because they are unfit to care for their children to have them being "molested, sexually assaulted, rape and pregnant" while in the state and the "system" care.

Yes I still blame the system.


Our "system" is also allowind sexual pedrators to run free unattended and without monitoring so they can go around killing littler girls in florida also.

So they can get buried alive after the sexual pedrator had his fill with them.

Yes I still blame the system.



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 08:08 AM
link   
There was a 13 year old boy in NY that ran away from the doctor's office the other day. They immediately began to search for him. and well, one of the first things out of there mounths were: We want to know why he ran away."

This 13 year old girl, on the other hand, now that she is already someone's paycheck, disappears, and well I heard that there was no missing persons report filed for her, so no search, and, well, susposedly I guess she spent some of the time living with something like a 30 year old.

Talk about a double standard being played out!!

No one askes why she ran away, do they? Heck, it's possible I guess, that no one even was looking for her.

Maybe we shouldn't have wasted the money and resources searching for the 13 year old boy, I mean, he was the one who chose to run away, let him face the consequences!! A few weeks wandering around a strange city might teach him a lesson!!

[edit on 4-5-2005 by dawnstar]



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 08:16 AM
link   
Let me get this straight Marg:
Your asserting that it is the State's fault that she got pregnant? Huh?
Am I missing something here?
Did she not agree to having consensual sex with whomever she had sex with?
Are you indicating and admitting that she, as with you, are not taking responsibility for their actions, but instead are blaming someone or something other than who should rightly be blamed: herself or yourself?
:shk:



seekerof

[edit on 4-5-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 08:21 AM
link   
Would this discussion change if she was raped?



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
Sorry Seekerof is the state fault that she was taken from her "incapable parents" and taken to a "shelter" and let her "run away" and get "rape" because after all she is only 13 years old.



That is wrong assumption about here being taken away from her prents marge.

I saw a taped interview last night with the mother on Fox I think it was where the mother had stated she gave the child away two or three years ago.

Also how do you know she was raped? With out all the facts that is imposibble to determine. One would think if she was raped she would have said so, however there has been no mention by any story I read stating she was raped.

Granted in the eyes of the law it would be considered as statutory rape, but for all anyone knows she may have put on make up and looked 18 to some unknown john on the street who hired her as a prostitute thinking she was legal age.



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 08:24 AM
link   
If she was raped?
When?
We are not talking "ifs" here, we are talking actualities and what is.
Let me hazard a guess, being she ran away from the state facility she was at, that if she had gotten raped, it would also be the state's fault right?




seekerof



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 08:25 AM
link   
Seekerof under our "laws" a 13 year old girl doesn't have consensual sex, is rape.

Are you defending that a 13 year old girls should be allowed to have consensual sex with men?

It seems that in your pursue to prove me wrong you are completely ignoring the fact that a 13 year old ran under the care of the state and got pregnant, and that is rape no consensual under our laws.

Now if were you live they allow 13 year old to run free and have "consensual sex" then I will like to know were you live.

Also would you allowed your own daughter to have "consensual" sex at 13?

I tell you what you do that and you will be charge for it.

I blame the system still.



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 08:29 AM
link   
Marg, I know what the dern Florida laws say.
But I also know that this little 13 yo girl did not get raped and had consensual sex. That is not rape unless she or the state pursues this and charges whomever it was that had consensual sex with her with "rape," k?

Oh, btw, if whomever she had consensual sex with is under 18, it is NOT considered "rape".

seekerof

[edit on 4-5-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 08:44 AM
link   
Seekerof do you think the state after their lack of supervision are going to pursue charges against the man that have sex with her?

NO..............they would not, you know why? Because it happen under their responsible care, it fail and if failed bad.

They don't want any more publicity that the one they got to push for her to have her child.

NO...............The state knows that they look very bad, after all they are the ones that goes around taking children from homes, bad homes and bad parents but fail to keep the children secure.

Right?

[edit on 4-5-2005 by marg6043]



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 08:54 AM
link   
The point is, she ran away. Had she gotten pregnant in the orphanage, shelter, whatever, THEN there would be hell to pay. I don't think they should "lock her up for her own protection" just because she doesn't like hanging out in the crappy orphanage, which is what I think marg is getting at.

A girl running away from an orphanage and falling into a life of sorrow -- state's fault? Please. It's the girl's fault, unless some social worker for some reason encouraged her to run away, which I doubt.

It's not the state's fault, it's the girl's. These things happen.

Zip



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 08:54 AM
link   
Yeah, Marg....
Her time as a runaway was over a month....state's fault.
State's fault she got pregnant...
State's fault she is now having to get an abortion....
State's fault for everything, huh, Marg?
Yeah...

Nice. :shk:
Tell me sometime which state you live in, so I can avoid it.




seekerof



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 09:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Yeah, Marg....
Her time as a runaway was over a month....state's fault.
State's fault she got pregnant...
State's fault she is now having to get an abortion....
State's fault for everything, huh, Marg?
Yeah...

Nice. :shk:
Tell me sometime which state you live in, so I can avoid it.



Seekerof, You have used those self-same arguments to say that it is the parents fault for the ills that befall their children. A the mother had turned over supervision of the 13 yr old girl to the state of florida, then the state is and should be held liable for it's neglect in supervising minors. Remember, this is not the first big "mistake" that has been attributed to cps in florida, last year the news was of how fla. cps had "lost" track of a young girl who they had placed into a foster home for over 2 years. How was this discovered? the find of the girls remains in another state. give me a few minutes and if you wish, i will post a link to that story for you.



seekerof



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 09:07 AM
link   
sorry, double post, somehow...

[edit on 4-5-2005 by dawnstar]



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 09:08 AM
link   
actually, the fact that people are trying to figure out weather or not the girl was raped in order to determine weather or not she is justified in having an abortion tells me alot. Many people have came out and said one simple fact that some seem to just want to forget and continue on their merry way... For a 12 yr old child to have a baby is dangerous to her health!! Much more so than an adult.

We can sacrifice thousands of our soldiers and innocent iraqi lives to protect us from the terrorists.

and, don't tell me, that if someone came into your home, and you knew for certain that their intention was to kill you or your family, you wouldn't feel justified in defending your self.

I don't know, buy unless someone can prove to me that her age didn't significantly increase her risks, I've got to ask, would we be asking her to to possilbly sacrifice her life, for that of her baby if we didn't let her have it.

Just like, well, we shouldn't have interferred if she chosed to carry to child to full term, chosing her baby's live above hers. The point I am making is that is should have been solely her choice, since she is the one who is being asked to make the sacrifice- possibly the ultimate sacrifice at that.

The sacrifices a woman makes to bring a child into the world can be anything from gaining a little weight and having a few stretch marks to losing her income to being incompacitated for months to the ultimate, death. At the very core, one has to accept this fact, it is the individuals choice as to weather or not she makes that sacrifice. Since it is her that is called upon to make it. And, well, while she is doing so, she has to consider all the other people in her life that her decision will affect. Can she justify bringing a child in the world if it means that she will be bedridden for months and she is the sole caretaker for her children and well, she has no idea who will care for them while she can't. Should her children have to sacrifice their mother, possibly tend to their own need, even if they are very, very young? No law can encompass all the possible scenerios that could be played out. And you can paint rosey pictures where neighbors, friends and family rushes to her aid all you want, or a government that rushes in to save the day....you just won't be painting the real world.
She's the one who is to make the sacrifice, she's the one who should decide, and well, in the end, it will be her who facies God in the end to answer for her acts...not you!

the right to life is making a major error if they can't accomodate the idea that that sacrifice might be too much to ask.

[edit on 4-5-2005 by dawnstar]

[edit on 4-5-2005 by dawnstar]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join