Baseball bat abortion

[nbcrusader]

Is it illegal for minors to have sex without consent?

Are you referring to statutory rape?

 

[Do Miss America]

Are you referring to statutory rape?

But does that work for two minors? Or just when an adult sleeps with a minor?

 

[nbcrusader]

But does that work for two minors? Or just when an adult sleeps with a minor?

It is a strict liability law and does not require that one person be an adult.

 

[Do Miss America]

So technically it's illegal for 2 16 year old to have sex? and both would get charged with statutory rape?

 

[nbcrusader]

So technically it's illegal for 2 16 year old to have sex? and both would get charged with statutory rape?

Technically, both could be charged, but in reality only the males is charged.

 

[Angela Harlem]

I really don't understand why you quoted what I said and then replied to it with the above.

What I was saying is in regards to it not being assualt on the girl. It was consensual. It resulted in the loss of a fetus and that is the crime he is being charged with (and she should be as well.)

I really don't get your response. Sorry.

I dont get it either now I read back...
Sorry!

I think I agreed with you though? I wrote that with a renewed feeling of disgust at what he'd done so it might have come across as directed at you...Sorry again

 

[Angela Harlem]

You've based your support of abortion on very emotional terms.


And let me try to clear up some of the confusion about my comment on the logic presented:

1. Act "X" is illegal.
2. Some people want to do act "X" despite it being illegal
3. When these people do act "X", they sometime hurt themselves
4. Therefore, we should make act "X" legal to prevent the harm.



In all that logic, you've ignore the harm done to the unborn child.

Yay we finally agree on something


Though, by this logic, this is also why I disagree with the death penalty. Act X being murder, some want to do it but it is illegal. Point 3 is moot as injury to the perpetrator is not an issue. Point 4 remains steadfast as murder is illegal regardless, but in a similarity to this case, allowing death of a person be it a fetus or adult, death is permissable in controlled circumstances and by state and court appointed personnel.

That is a hypocrisy not based on emotion, but it's irrelevant to the discussion anyway.

 

[Irvine511]

You've based your support of abortion on very emotional terms.


And let me try to clear up some of the confusion about my comment on the logic presented:

1. Act "X" is illegal.
2. Some people want to do act "X" despite it being illegal
3. When these people do act "X", they sometime hurt themselves
4. Therefore, we should make act "X" legal to prevent the harm.



In all that logic, you've ignore the harm done to the unborn child.

i don't think concern for the disasterous health and social consequences -- as demonstrated in this article, where parental consent laws created a situation similar, in the mind of this particular girl -- that outlawing abortion would cause to be emotional at all. if you can, please point out the emotionality of my support for *choice.*

your logic is simply too black and white for reality, which is why the law in addition to being a living thing that changes and adapts and has degrees of legality, criminality, culpability, etc. if the law is anything, it's complex.

finally, the X you point to is harmful only when it is done by people who aren't trained medical professionals.

you're also equating the life of a fetus to that of the mother -- the law does not hold them as equals.

 

[thacraic]

I dont get it either now I read back...
Sorry!

I think I agreed with you though? I wrote that with a renewed feeling of disgust at what he'd done so it might have come across as directed at you...Sorry again

It's ok I think the way I worded it was poor. Yes I am disgusted with what has happened. Its just awful.

Take care

 

[indra]

You've based your support of abortion on very emotional terms.

OK, I was going to stay out of it...and I'm leaving after this comment (yeah, yeah, yeah, I know -- promises, promises ).

If a pro-choice stance is based on emotion, isn't an anti-choice stance also based on emotion (wah, those poor babies!!!!)?

Without saying "because god said so" (because what your god thinks/says has no bearing on me), what other than emotion makes you anti-choice?

 

[U2Kitten]

Baseball bat, medical tools, either way, it's killing the baby. The stupid girl not only killed the poor baby she may have damaged her organs so she'll never be able to have kids, though IMO she doesn't deserve to be a mom It's sad the baby was big enough to feel pain

I knew I shouldn't have clicked on Indra's post. Nothing sets my temper off worse than the stupid term 'anti-choice.' That really boils my blood and makes me want to write a diatribe. Both pro and anti choice are worthless labels, because all different people approve or disapprove of different things. Unless you agree or disagree with EVERY choice it's hypocritical. But of course, those 'choice' labels are only cushy little covers for what abortion really is. Shut up with the fucking choice bullshit. It's pro abortion and anti abortion, and if you don't feel comfortable with those labels perhaps you need to reconsider your position. (btw I feel the same way about the terms pro and anti life)

 

[Angela Harlem]

If I mention life, will I be labelled as one of those fundie right to lifers that you guys mention sometimes?

I can't speak for nbc as he has more religion and god in his pinky finger than I have in my entire godless little body. But this isn't about god or choice or any of those things. It's about humanity wanting to value life more than it currently is and more near where it really should be. Those who believe that abortion should be an option of course DON'T think contrary to this, I know. I believe it shouldn't be such a readily available option until so many more have been explored - and again I'm not saying those who support choice are saying contrary. Every counter claim to any points I make are going to be very legitimately argued, as they are legitimate and very valid. Yet the figures alone show that there is a huge shortfall in preventing the need for abortion. I dont believe society should stop the availability of abortion because there are so many unfortunate circumstances which lead to it. Infact pretty much any woman who ends up at that choice is already in a tragic and saddening situation. That's no need to vilify them, or to criminalise the act, though some might argue that it is.

Perhaps that is emotion.

I'm really not making much sense today. Like always.

 

[BVS]

Baseball bat, medical tools, either way, ...

One's legal and one isn't. That is the point here.

 

[thacraic]

OK, I was going to stay out of it...and I'm leaving after this comment (yeah, yeah, yeah, I know -- promises, promises ).

If a pro-choice stance is based on emotion, isn't an anti-choice stance also based on emotion (wah, those poor babies!!!!)?

Without saying "because god said so" (because what your god thinks/says has no bearing on me), what other than emotion makes you anti-choice?

Not to answer for NB but, I think maybe the principle here in this case would be that of life and respecting that. Obviously people that are pro-life feel life begins at conception. That is a principle that people do in fact get emotional over, but it is a principle nonetheless.

 

[thacraic]

Yes so called consent or not he should be prosecuted, no matter what. He's being charged with feticide because a baby was lost and it's the higher of the two charges.

When did I ever say desperation was an excuse? I said consent under desperation I wouldn't exactly consider sound mind.

But for what, stupidity? I think it would be very difficult to prove her part in it. How do you prove her consent or that she wasn't temporarily insane?

I am not saything this kid should not be prosecuted. I really think you are failing to see the point here. You initially began stating that the difference in this is this is assualt not abortion essentially. The thing is, this boy is being tried for feticide not assault. THAT is the point I am making! It goes beyond assualt because a life was killed and as a result that is why the greater charge is being persued. You said in a post the difference to all of this is, what this boy did is assault. If it were assualt he would have been charged with that not the other.

I am not saying desperation is an excuse. I am saying that the boy could have been equally as desperate as the girl. You are automatically assuming that is not the case. You are also assuming it was the boy's idea. How do you know the girl didn't suggest it? How do you know that the boy was not reluctant to even do this and his girlfriend persuaded him? You are making these huge leaps here from the very limited information provided in that article. You are automatically assuming this boy thought all this up and carried it out and furthermore this girl was under emotional stress or was temporarily insane and was the victim in all of this. I don't see how you have come to these conclusions with the bits of information at hand.

The fact that they did not charge her, according to the article, is to do with local courts violating federal law. If they charged the girl it would violate Roe v Wade. So even if this girl had said "Yeh, it was all my idea and he really didn't want to do it but I pleded with him" it wouldn't have mattered. Had the child been able to sustain life at the point it was aborted, she would have then been charged as an accomplice. She should not be able to walk away from this and have this boy take all the blame. That is not just.

 

[U2Kitten]

One's legal and one isn't. That is the point here.

That's so hypocritical it makes me sick. How do you care how it died if you don't care if it dies as long as it's somebody's 'choice?' Wasn't this a 'choice' too?

 

[BVS]

Both sides are based on emotion. If it was science and fact it wouldn't be as controversial.

 

[thacraic]

One's legal and one isn't. That is the point here.

So what if this guy had the proper medical equipment to perform the procedure. Then what would he be charged with? Practicing medicine without a license?

 

[Angela Harlem]

You mean it's less emotional when it's done in a stark and sterile clinical environment?

 

[U2Kitten]

She should not be able to walk away from this and have this boy take all the blame. That is not just.

Exactly. Just another sick twist of the 'choice' bullshit.

Also on this subject, if the father of the baby has no say when a child is aborted, why is not okay for him to be a part of it? This boy did nothing more wrong than if he had driven her to the abortion clinic.

 

[thacraic]

Both sides are based on emotion. If it was science and fact it wouldn't be as controversial.

The reason it is law is because according to "scientific fact" life does not begin at conception.

 

[Angela Harlem]

that was to bvs's post..

 

[thacraic]

Exactly. Just another sick twist of the 'choice' bullshit.

Also on this subject, if the father of the baby has no say when a child is aborted, why is not okay for him to be a part of it? This boy did nothing more wrong than if he had driven her to the abortion clinic.

You are very right in that. People can not say "but he assualted her". If that were the case, he would be charged with that.

 

[Irvine511]

That's so hypocritical it makes me sick. How do you care how it died if you don't care if it dies as long as it's somebody's 'choice?' Wasn't this a 'choice' too?

law and society do not hold a fetus as equal to a person. you can argue about that, you can say that's wrong, and maybe you're right, but until you can convince society and the law otherwise, the abortion of a fetus is not the same as the death (or suicide) of a person.

in the meantime, why don't we improve the lives of women across the world so that all pregnancies are wanted pregnancies? that will never happen, but we can do better, can't we?

what drives me nuts about some in the anti-choice (and i know you don't agree with those terms, but i think they are apt) is that they are more concerned with what goes on in a woman's womb rather than the world she grows up in.

 

[Irvine511]

The reason it is law is because according to "scientific fact" life does not begin at conception.

erm, "scientific fact"? are you a scientist?

 

[Irvine511]

So what if this guy had the proper medical equipment to perform the procedure. Then what would he be charged with? Practicing medicine without a license?

he'd also have to be trained to do it which would then make him a doctor -- the person who is licensed to practice a medical procedure. if i sell my friend morphine it's illegal, but if a doctor administers me morphine -- because he is a *trained professional* -- it is legal.

 

[BVS]

That's so hypocritical it makes me sick. How do you care how it died if you don't care if it dies as long as it's somebody's 'choice?' Wasn't this a 'choice' too?

Oh joy once again the obligatory holier than thou speech. Look you have no f**king right to sit there and tell me I don't care how it happens as long as it's "choice". Look back at my post and tell me where exactly I've been on the side of the boy with the bat. Just show me.

What is hypocritical about seeing the difference where the procedure is done under a sterile environment with the hands of professionals and that where a woman could have been damaged for life? We both know exactly where we stand on this issue, but don't tell me that I don't care and call me hypocrite.

 

[BVS]

So what if this guy had the proper medical equipment to perform the procedure. Then what would he be charged with? Practicing medicine without a license?

It still wouldn't be legal if he wasn't a doctor. What's your point?

 

[BVS]

You mean it's less emotional when it's done in a stark and sterile clinical environment?

Who said that?

 

[thacraic]

erm, "scientific fact"? are you a scientist?

Ok Mr. Condescending. You don't have to be a scientist to know that is what science states. Does it not state that? Then what are the laws based on? Or do I need to be a lawyer to know those kind of things?