Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 289434070_10224150161087916_5906680846498239328_n.jpg?stp=dst-jpg_p526x296&_nc_cat=108&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=5cd70e&_nc_ohc=rF51wJW1qzAAX_5WM9j&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&oh=00_AT_ALyOtxoz1335wv7pWkT1rGnqzpb2acd4uChU3KYTpcQ&oe=62C50D1
    "What you're doing, speaks so loudly, that I can't hear what you are saying"

    Comment


    • Ohio had a 10 year old that was raped have to travel to Indiana for an abortion because she was 6 weeks + 3 days pregnant. Probably won't be able to happen soon because Indiana will surely be more strict than us in the end.

      As Ohio outlawed abortions after six weeks, doctors in neighboring Indiana described an influx of patients from out-of-state seeking the procedure, including a pregnant 10-year-old.

      Comment


      • I wonder where the parents were in weeks 1-5? Seems like this situation should have been addressed earlier.
        "What you're doing, speaks so loudly, that I can't hear what you are saying"

        Comment


        • I don't know the circumstances. All I can say is that a 10 year old girl shouldn't be forced by law to carry her pregnancy to term in any circumstances.

          Comment


          • Ohio doesn’t have an exception for rape? That’s crazy.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Mike View Post
              Ohio doesn’t have an exception for rape? That’s crazy.
              Nope. No exceptions for minors either. Abortion is basically unrestricted up to 6 weeks but after that the ONLY exceptions are both medical. One is if the fetus stops having a "heartbeat", IOW a stillborn child. The second is a serious threat to the life of the mother or risk permanently disabling her. And I think (off the top of my head) you need TWO doctors to testify to that and not just one.

              And believe me, there are definitely authorities in ruby red areas that will be keeping a very, very close eye on that second exception. There's going to be a decent number of criminal investigations of miscarriages going forward.

              Comment


              • 6-weeks is too short of a window.
                "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is sometimes hard to verify their authenticity." -Abraham Lincoln

                Comment


                • To me its more troubling that it took so long to act on a rape, than the actual abortion itself.

                  I mean, if I'm the parent of a 10 year old girl who was impregnated during a rape, I'd want my daughter treated ASAP. Not 6+ weeks later.

                  And a 10 year old was able to get pregnant? She was mensturating and developing breasts already?

                  I've never raised a girl, but I thought that didn't take place until about 12 or so.

                  I guess I learn more every day.
                  "What you're doing, speaks so loudly, that I can't hear what you are saying"

                  Comment


                  • See, Liney, that’s the thing. They likely didn’t expect her to be fertile. It is possible for a child to get pregnant before she has her first period. Also, pregnancy tests take several weeks before they will show positive and fertility isn’t common -at all- in a child that young. Finding fault with the parents is misplaced in this case, imo.

                    Six weeks is too narrow a window.
                    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is sometimes hard to verify their authenticity." -Abraham Lincoln

                    Comment


                    • Okay.

                      I admitted I've never raised a girl.

                      And Biology was one of the classes in HS that I flunked.

                      I guess I'm firmly entrenched in the 'white guys who don't know s#it" group.
                      "What you're doing, speaks so loudly, that I can't hear what you are saying"

                      Comment


                      • 289988687_10224155660025386_3788014575307411669_n.jpg?stp=dst-jpg_s640x640&_nc_cat=110&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=5cd70e&_nc_ohc=wODak4cj4rYAX8iqGgu&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&oh=00_AT-rd2yuyEkiRxaoVOthBO4b3rkV_fPhhCwMJz_KzKKVBw&oe=62C5B8B
                        "What you're doing, speaks so loudly, that I can't hear what you are saying"

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Jeff Buchanan View Post
                          Well the South Carolina stuff is absurd. I've been a pro-choice advocate for decades - for at least as long as I can remember the debatable issues. My position is not swayed by arguments involving appeals to the fetus is a "'person" at conception or any time you might prefer after that, therefore abortion is murder. I can agree with the position that a fetus is a person at some gestational point (13 weeks seems about right to me).

                          The Catholic church's position on legitimacy of killing a life form (based on the Sixth Commandment) is vastly different than, say, the Jewish view, among others. This leads me to believe that a driving force behind any US courts’ position that abortion should be unlawful are invidious, idiosyncratic religious influences on the interpretation of the law. I'd suggest the Freedom of Religion Clause of the 1st A specifically bars legal intervention into practice, whether legislative or by judicial fiat.

                          In simple terms, The 1st A (either Freedom of Religion Clause or Rights to privacy of a choice of religion Clause) and 9th A (protects a fundamental right to privacy in ways not provided for in the first eight amendments) trumps multiple arguments by the State based on different criteria that a duty to protect the fetus is implied based on the concept of religiously or otherwise defined “morality” or “natural law.”

                          Not hard ..... other than understanding what the US Constitution says. It's pretty clear that is hard for a lot of folks.

                          Edit: I probably didn't need to state my position as it invites unproductive arguments from those that won't agree with me and are convinced their positions are as right as mine is. Talent's post on this is way better.
                          Well, Talent's is better, but why post something so purposefully ignorant on the Tenach and other Jewish law. Both Israel and Judah had kings who practiced child sacrifice. Rabbis teach that God viewed the practice as "so evil that it never entered His mind" which is a pretty interesting statement when you consider an omniscient God.

                          Further, Christians and Jews both believe in natural law that protects "life, liberty, and property" as memorialized in the Fifth Amendment. The common law is generally dated to 1066, so it is not an exaggeration to say that killing babies has been illegal for a thousand years in civil courts. To tag Christians and Jew's views on abortion as invidious, idiosyncratic religious influences on the interpretation of the law. flies in the face of millions of believers over thousands of years. Instead, you substitute your own religion, atheism, and say your view is so clearly the right one that you don't even want to discuss it. Arrogant, JB.



                          Comment


                          • Jeff, do not feed the Flat Earther. Let him happily dwell in his alternate reality.
                            I don't watch Fox News for the same reason I don't eat out of a toilet.

                            Comment


                            • They even suck at lying.
                              Shut the fuck up Donny!

                              Comment


                              • It’s not lying if you don’t know what the actual answer is.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X