It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Tinkleflower
Actually, that's not as black and white as it might seem; simply because she cannot give informed consent to sex (being that she cannot fully understand the ramifications therein), then there might just be the assumption that she therefore cannot speak for herself in any related matter. A 9 year old child can sometimes biologically conceive, and give birth - yet we'd fight any which way we can to avoid that situation, correct?
Originally posted by DaRAGE
Thats right, My friend has an implant. She got some small metalic tube like thing inserted in to her arm. It lasts for three years.
It stops her getting pregnant and stops her having periods. For as long as it's in for 3 years.
Almost all the comments I've read on this thread concern the "right" of this woman to have a child -vs- the government sterilizing her.
It's been established the girl/woman cannot look after herself, much less a child and that the state would have to take custody of any children and then put them in foster homes or put them out for adoption.
What I haven't yet heard is any mention of what taking the children (if any) away from her would do to her.
She certainly would not understand the necessity of the move and probably wouldn't agree with it.
I have no idea how she would cope mentally, but I can't believe it would be very well.
This is not a precedent setting case as far as I can see, so a flurry of similar cases is not likely to pop up if the court rules for the guardian.
I can see why the judge is ruling on this part of the case independently of the rest of it. Heck, he probably has the same misgivings as we do at the thought of government forced sterilization. On the other hand, he can't just duck the question--he has to rule one way or the other eventually. I really would not want to be in his shoes.
Originally posted by WyrdeOne
That's because some people still care about the inalienable rights God granted us.
My right to live and breed was NOT bestowed by the state, and as such, it shall not, under any circumstances, be taken away by the state.
You're willing to deny this woman the right to immortality through children because you think you know best.
The particulars of her faculties are known only to her and her doctors.
If you know anything about the law, EVERY case is precedent setting. Each new case that gets resolved adds to the body of evidence used to judge precedent in future cases.
He's trying not to elicit massive public outcry by exploring all the options.
Probably because he wants to save his own skin/reputation, rather than some altruistic concern for the life of this poor woman.
Originally posted by Lamagraa
I just dont think its right doing something like this without the person wanting to or as a capital punishment even though it would be considered strange/crude
the whole thing reeks of someone wanting to hurt someone else
Originally posted by Lamagraa
ya but its not for her entire life she could quit if she wanted to
I'm sorry, but I've got to disagree here. God is not a lawyer, and God did not write the laws of this land. If the entire argument is based on a religious belief (which not everyone shares), then it's flawed to begin with, you know?
Your right to breed is not bestowed by anyone or anything, realistically. It's a biological action, and one that's granted to you by nothing other than your being part of a particular species, and being lucky enough not to have any physical reason for being infertile.
Perhaps it could be argued that an adult who is emotionally capable of fully consenting to sex, and understands the consequences therein, has an inherent right to breed - if this holds true (which I think is what you're saying?) then this is countered by the apparent fact (at least as stated by her legal guardian) that the woman does not have the ability to understand those ramifications, and in the same way it would render a child incapable of making those decisions herself based upon similar criteria.
That's exactly right. You don't know that she's capable of comprehending the real consequences of sex, childbirth and raising a child, any more than we don't know for sure if she's unable to do so. That's the problem