Jivin J’s Life Links 10-25-10
by JivinJ, host of the blog, JivinJehoshaphat
- The Alliance Defense Fund has secured a temporary restraining order which prevents the parents of teenage girl in TX from forcing her to have an abortion:On two occasions, the teenager’s mother literally dragged her to local abortion facilities, including International Healthcare Solutions and Planned Parenthood of the TX Capital Region, demanding that her daughter terminate the life of her child.
Though she refused and the child’s father also does not want the baby killed, her parents continued to insist that they will force her to have the abortion. The court’s order prevents that from happening.
- The Live Action blog has a video of a speech by Stephanie Gray, Executive Director of the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform, relaying what she believes is the best pro-life argument.
- CO abortionist Richard Grossman (who previously claimed “When a woman says a fetus is a person, I think it is one. I believe the woman empowers the fetus,” is one of those “the world is overpopulated” types and is somehow employed at a Catholic hospital) has an editorial in the Durango Herald against CO’s personhood amendment. In it he ridiculously claims:
If Amendment 62 passes, it would make removing a diseased ovary illegal. Worse, a doctor who performs such a lifesaving surgery would be punished for murder.
… [T]he proposed Amendment 62 says: “… the term ‘person’ shall apply to every human being from the beginning of the biological development of that human being.”
Anyone who graduated from an 8th-grade health class knows that the start of the biological development is the human egg, and girls are born with all the eggs that their ovaries will ever contain. So removing an ovary – even if diseased – would mean the removal of thousands of “persons.“
Looks like Grossman wasn’t paying much attention in his 8th grade health class if he thinks the biological development of a human being starts as a human egg. If that’s the case then women would reproduce asexually.
- An OH probate judge allowed a 17-year-old to marry her boyfriend without her parents’ permission because the girl believed her parents would force her to have an abortion if she was living with them:
According to [Judge Alan S.] Acker’s ruling, Gabrielle [Squeglia] (pictured right at the prom with husband Dustin Goldman) believed she would be forced to have an abortion if she remained at home.
“Gabby felt she was in an unsafe environment for her baby,” said Jerome “Jerry” Goldman, Dustin’s father and a lawyer who was admitted to the OH bar in 1973. According to Acker’s entry, testimony demonstrated that “Gabrielle is currently living in a volatile home where Gabrielle fears for her and her unborn child’s physical and mental health and safety.”
Gabrielle’s parents said they were never told of a hearing and never got to tell their side….
His wife said she never pushed her daughter toward an abortion and recently saw a priest for guidance. The Rev. Michael Watson, of St. Andrew Church in Upper Arlington, confirmed that Mrs. Squeglia phoned Wednesday, worried that her daughter had married so young and asking for help. He said he recommended a woman’s care center “that preserves life.”
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Please see the Center Against Forced Abortion and download the information. The letters can be handed out to those trying to force someone to get an abortion, for the person being forced and also the abortionist. Important for sidewalk counselors!
http://www.txjf.org/pages.asp?pageid=99931
What business is it of the “Alliance Defense Fund” to get involved in a dispute like this between a minor child and her parents?
Isn’t this the case where people observed this mother forcefully dragging her child by the hair, abusively and against her will, into an abortion mill?
I’d say it’s more than a “dispute.” It’s child abuse. And forced abortion is ILLEGAL.
Yes, Kel.
Same girl.
This minor child at the age of 16 is also a mother who DID NOT want an abortion. She has every right to use every legal avenue available to her to not be FORCED to abort!
Joan,You honestly think it is ok for others to force someone to abort their baby against their will??
I suspect that the “Alliance Defense Fund” here is exaggerating the facts of the situation for their own political ends. Parents have all sorts of ways of pressuring their children to behave in a certain way. What’s next, is the ADF going to step in and get a restraining order issued against a mother trying to force her kids to eat their vegetables?
I was involved with this particular situation, Joan. What’s to exaggerate? The sidewalk counselors witnessed this mother dragging her daughter into two clinics BY HER HAIR! Trying to force her to abort.
There is now a restraining order in place for the parents. THANK GOD!
Forcing your own child to kill your grandchild is hardly the same as eating veggies, eh Joan? But I am sure you know that.
Pretty girl. But that’s so young to get married — yet my mother was married at 19, just two years older than Gabrielle, and it will be 55 years in March of 2011.
I wish this young couple and their child the best of luck.
Readers here might also want to check out JP Nunez’ recent piece at Ethika Politika: “Are Fetuses Rational?”
http://www.cfmpl.org/blog/2010/10/25/are-fetuses-rational/
Even if that is the case, Carla, this ultimately might permanently destroy the relationship the girl has with her parents. What if they throw her out of the house and she ends up living a life of poverty, possibly even turning to drugs or prostitution? Obviously the girl’s family cannot withstand the burden of their daughter going through with an unwanted pregnancy and ending up with another mouth to feed, especially in this economic climate, but of course the “Alliance Defense Fund” knows much better about what a minor girl should do with a life-changing event like pregnancy than her own mother.
yes – I am sure that to any pro-choice person, anything that speaks to trying to save the child and the mother is an exaggeration.
Just as the daughter should not be forced to have an abortion, the child in the womb should not be forced to die in case there is less than a perfect life.
And is anyone finding it ironic that the pro-choicers are saying that the parents should have some rights in their minor daughter’s decisions? Every one of those decisions unless it is to help save the mother and child from the violence of abortion.
Most parents do come around to see that child as a member of the family. It may take time, but love ultimately wins.
So, joan, am I to infer then, that you are FOR parental notification in the case of a minor abortion?
First of all Joan, have you ever considered that her relationship with her parents had already been damaged beyond repair by DRAGGING HER BY THE HAIR INTO AN ABORTION CLINIC??? Sounds to me like the court is rescuing her!
Second of all, if you have listened at all to what has been said here, she has been and will be taken care of by the folks fighting for her rights! This is what the pro-life movement is all about, giving these girls a REAL choice, one that takes into account all her needs, emotional, medical, economic, relationship.
Man, some people just never listen….
If my mother tried to force me to abort her grandchild, I’d say she would have hurt our relationship plenty before we got to court.
A commenter wrote: “_____ knows much better about what a minor girl should do with a life-changing event like pregnancy than her own mother.”
Now, if we fill in the blank with anything else, oh, say for example, Planned Parenthood or NARAL, then we would no doubt puncture a big hole in the pro-abortion idea that minor children CAN abort their babies without their parents’ consent. My body my choice goes both ways. If a mother who is under the age of 18 desires to carry her pregnancy to term, she has every moral and legal right to do so. It’s HER body. It’s HER CHOICE.
This girl wants to carry her baby to term. She doesn’t want an abortion. The father of the child doesn’t want the abortion either.
It is obviously too hard for you to grasp, Joan.
But just so we are clear YOU CANNOT FORCE SOMEONE TO ABORT AGAINST THEIR WILL!
Meditate on that.
Whatever happened to CHOICE???
“Now, if we fill in the blank with anything else, oh, say for example, Planned Parenthood or NARAL, then we would no doubt puncture a big hole in the pro-abortion idea that minor children CAN abort their babies without their parents’ consent. My body my choice goes both ways. If a mother who is under the age of 18 desires to carry her pregnancy to term, she has every moral and legal right to do so. It’s HER body. It’s HER CHOICE.”
The difference, of course, is that in the case of an abortion there is no baby and therefore no further legal responsibilities incurred. If this minor girl carries her pregnancy to term, then her mother is still responsible for all associated costs, medical and otherwise.
Abusive parents, if they do not get help, in the end lose whatever relationship they might have had with their child. Yes. I am speaking from experience.
Yet another example of the typical pro-abort mindset that “My Body, My Choice” only works when the “Choice” leads to abortion.
And still they state they are pro-“CHOICE”.
Give them enough rope, as they saying goes….
“This girl wants to carry her baby to term. She doesn’t want an abortion. The father of the child doesn’t want the abortion either.”
Of course they don’t want an abortion. They’re not going to be on the hook for the baby, financially; their parents will be. This girl is young and dumb and doesn’t understand the responsibility of being a parent; she just wants a new toy. That’s all it is to her; a doll.
ah yes – a doll that has human life! Hard work – yes – and anything in life that is worth-while is! And while that young girl does not really understand the undertaking – did any of us know with certainty what would happen when we became parents?
Again – why are people trying to justify the ending of a human life because the situation is not ideal, or for any other reason?
Is it ok for any human to purposely end another human’s life?
Carla @ 1:08,
Thanks for the link! I didn’t realize there is a letter that can be sent to abortion clinics to prevent them from legally aborting a specific woman’s child. Very good to know!
Part of the letter to the abortionist
I am currently pregnant and I am aware that state and federal law allows me to obtain the reproductive health care
which I determine to be in my best interest, including abortion or prenatal care. After having fully considered all of
my options, I have independently decided to continue my pregnancy to term. However, I am being subjected to
coercion by others which is meant to compel me to terminate my pregnancy. This coercion may include but is not
limited to threats, intimidation, force or threats of force. I am hereby giving you notice that if I am brought to your
facility [a] I will not be in a position to express my true wishes regarding my pregnancy, [b] it is against my will to
terminate my pregnancy, and [c] I may be accompanied by at least one other person whose objective is to prevent
me from either withholding or withdrawing my consent for an abortion. Given these circumstances, I will not be in
a position to freely give legal consent for such a procedure. Should you perform an abortion on me despite being
informed of this fact, you may be subject to criminal prosecution and/or civil liability for committing or conspiring
to commit one or more of the following:
·aggravated assault ·child abuse ·failure to report suspected child abuse
·wrongful death ·kidnapping ·failure to obtain informed consent
·injury to a child ·fraud/misrepresentation ·interference with parental relation
·sexual assault ·wrongful imprisonment ·medical license violations
Janet,
You cannot LEGALLY force anyone to abort their child.
joan
October 25th, 2010 at 2:48 pm
Of course they don’t want an abortion. They’re not going to be on the hook for the baby, financially; their parents will be. This girl is young and dumb and doesn’t understand the responsibility of being a parent; she just wants a new toy. That’s all it is to her; a doll.
Oh, it’s all about the money with you, isn’t it? If someone costs too much money in upkeep, we should just kill them! That’s so much better.
You. Can. Not. Know. What. This. Girl. Thinks. You don’t know her. You’ve never spoken with her. You don’t know her parents, her boyfriend, her friends, or her hair color! That hair she was being dragged into that clinic by? And yet, here you come, the authority from on high, proclaiming that she has no right to decide to keep her child, if that’s her decision. This means two things.
One, you absolutely are pro-abortion. Period. Supporting a forced abortion (very, very forced) can make you nothing else.
Two, you are the one who supports controlling women’s bodies. Not the pro-lifers who want to give this girl, and her child, freedom and support, but you. You who are arguing for the undermining of her agency and the denial of her will. And you claim to be a Christian. Dragging a screaming girl into an abortion clinic to tie her down and kill her child by force is not an action that displays God’s love to the world. Arguing in favor of such tactics isn’t on the list, either.
If you ever call yourself “pro-choice” again in your life, remember how hypocritical that really makes you. And if you ever say it again where I can hear/read it, I’m going to laugh and link to this thread.
“You. Can. Not. Know. What. This. Girl. Thinks. You don’t know her. You’ve never spoken with her. You don’t know her parents, her boyfriend, her friends, or her hair color! That hair she was being dragged into that clinic by? And yet, here you come, the authority from on high, proclaiming that she has no right to decide to keep her child, if that’s her decision. This means two things.”
I proclaimed no such thing. What I said is that this ADF organization should not be inserting itself into a dispute between a minor child and her parents.
It’s called child abuse. Authorities have to intervene in cases of child abuse. Don’t worry your pretty little head, Joan. Child Protection Services were also called.
ADF is working on behalf of this 16 year old who doesn’t want an abortion. She has the right to NOT have one, no matter what her abusive mother says.
The troll that calls itself Joan did indeed state, not speculate, that the young woman in question only wanted said baby as a doll.
I speculate that Joan is neither named Joan, nor a female. I also posit that this troll is probably not even associated with the pro-choice crowd. Instead, I believe that the troll that calls itself Joan is here for the express purpose of annoying the pro-life individuals who comment on Jill Stanek’s blog. This commenter has no stance on any issue whatsoever and will only contradict whatever is being blogged or commented about.
Joan,
I’m trying to follow the logic here. You say,
“Even if that is the case, Carla, this ultimately might permanently destroy the relationship the girl has with her parents.”
I would say that a girl who desperately seeks to save the life of her yet-to-be-born child from grandma who is equally desperate in her attempts to have it slaughtered has already suffered a rupture in the relationship that will take a lifetime to heal. If her murderous mother succeeds in having the grandchild killed, much more than the mother-daughter relationship will perish. I would imagine that this girl could be driven to madness or suicide.
And what of the much ballyhooed “choice”? In cases such as this, “choice” advocates argue for coercion ending in the death of the child. In this they reveal their true colors. They are drunk with the blood of innocents, an insatiable thirst that demands ever more as it drives men and women to utter destruction.
In medicine, patients FAR YOUNGER have an ethical right to stop cancer treatments and refuse surgeries when it is determined that they are burdened beyond their ability to withstand the surgery or treatments. Parents have lost court battles to overrule their children’s wishes and watched them succumb to their diseases. So why should a 17 year-old be compelled to a surgical procedure that clearly would burden her beyond her ability to withstand the aftermath? She is more than capable enough to raise the child with minimal supplemental aid from social services, if such aid is even necessary.
Society rails against the trend of young men impregnating girls and walking away. Here we have a young couple willing to give it a shot for the sake of their child, and people show up here seriously arguing against that?
Then you say,
“What I said is that this ADF organization should not be inserting itself into a dispute between a minor child and her parents.”
I don’t believe that I have ever seen you rail against Planned Parenthood’s doing just that as their means of financial and existential survival.
You don’t come off very well here Joan. It smacks of duplicity and bloodthirst.
joan
October 25th, 2010 at 3:17 pm
I proclaimed no such thing. What I said is that this ADF organization should not be inserting itself into a dispute between a minor child and her parents.
Yes, you did. You said she thinks of this child as a doll and that her parents have the right to overrule her since they’d be financially responsible for her baby (another thing you can’t know). You also compared forcibly dragging her into an abortion clinic by dint of physical violence to requiring her to eat vegetables.
But obviously you must be right. Advocacy on behalf of a minor whose parents clearly do not have her best interests at heart is a horrible thing and the ADF are clearly evil monsters with blackened and despicable hearts.
This girl is young and dumb and doesn’t understand the responsibility of being a parent; she just wants a new toy.
Oh, but surely in her comprehensive sex ed class they told her how one is probably not ready for sex if one is not ready to accept responsibility of parenting? Right?
ninek, I’m inclined to agree with you.
“It’s called child abuse. Authorities have to intervene in cases of child abuse. Don’t worry your pretty little head, Joan. Child Protection Services were also called.”
Really? Called? And what did they do, exactly? I’ll guess nothing, since this isn’t child abuse in any way. Sometimes parents must compel their children to do things that their children don’t want to do, for their own wellbeing. I think this is one of those times.
“I would say that a girl who desperately seeks to save the life of her yet-to-be-born child from grandma who is equally desperate in her attempts to have it slaughtered has already suffered a rupture in the relationship that will take a lifetime to heal. If her murderous mother succeeds in having the grandchild killed, much more than the mother-daughter relationship will perish. I would imagine that this girl could be driven to madness or suicide.”
It is interesting to me how so-called pro-lifers always try to play up the possibility of a woman destroying herself after having an abortion. I can’t help but think that you relish this when it happens because it vindicates your stance on this issue. Never once have I seen someone here admit that most women live a perfectly happy and satisfying life after getting an abortion, without ever once feeling a lick of guilt or sadness over it. As for the mother-daughter relationship here, I also think that you have no reasonable basis to conclude that it has suffered a permanent rupture. What I see here is a mother who is trying to do what is best for her daughter, even if her daughter doesn’t understand or appreciate it at her young age.
“So why should a 17 year-old be compelled to a surgical procedure that clearly would burden her beyond her ability to withstand the aftermath?”
Comparing an abortion to chemotherapy or other extreme treatments is just insane. Actually going through with this unwanted pregnancy is the act that would burden her beyond her ability to withstand the aftermath, whether she understands it now or not.
“I don’t believe that I have ever seen you rail against Planned Parenthood’s doing just that as their means of financial and existential survival.”
Planned Parenthood offers a commercial service that people voluntarily use. That simply is not comparable to some organization like the ADF trying to force it’s way into this situation when its only purpose is to promote a political ideology.
“Yes, you did. You said she thinks of this child as a doll and that her parents have the right to overrule her since they’d be financially responsible for her baby (another thing you can’t know).”
What I said is that this dispute should remain between the daughter and her parents, period, without a meddling third party. If the girl can convince her parents to let her go through with the pregnancy, then that’s fine; if not, the simple reality of the situation is that this is a minor child who is living under the roof of her parents and relies on them for her financial support. They shouldn’t have to physically force her to have an abortion; it should be as simple as saying that either she voluntarily goes through with the procedure or she can no longer rely on them for support.
This is not an unwanted pregnancy we are talking about. The mother of the baby wants her child to live.
They shouldn’t have to physically force her to have an abortion; it should be as simple as saying that either she voluntarily goes through with the procedure or she can no longer rely on them for support.
That Joan is called coercion. Which accounts for 64% of abortions.
I am sorry. I have fed the troll on this thread.
Ninek,
Joan is neither female, human, nor troll. Joan is a computer-generated virus unleashed on pro-life sites, a virus whose artificial logic is still in its infancy, as evidenced by the shallowness of its responses. I say we stop responding and wait for version 2.3 to come out, sometime early next year.
It’s not coercion, it’s explaining the facts to someone who is being unreasonable. It’s essentially saying “I cannot take on this financial burden, which I would be doing by default if I allow you, my minor child for whom I am legally and financially responsible, to go through with this pregnancy. Therefore, either you terminate this pregnancy or I can no longer furnish you with the material support you have come to expect as my dependent child”.
co·er·cion
[koh-ur-shuh
n] 
Show IPA
Then you would agree that parents often use coercion to get their kids to act in a certain way, and that is perfectly acceptable? If so, I think it’s entirely beside the point whether or not the mother is “coercing” her daughter here.
In some states it is against the law to coerce someone to get an abortion. They are called no coercion bills. In fact in our state Joan(the one we share) I was called to testify for the bill.
I’ll say it again. You cannot force anyone to get an abortion against their will. In some states it is against the law to coerce someone to abort.
We are not talking about veggies or bedtimes or homework or potty training, Joan.
Joan, do you really think a parent should be able to force their child to have an abortion? At any age where the child is old enough to conceive, they’re old enough to refuse to abort. I think it’s fine to give them the option, and to support them if they want to abort, but that’s as far as I’d go. If they said they want to have the baby, I’d support that decision, even if I didn’t agree it was the best thing. If I couldn’t afford the financial burden, I’d tell my daughter that too. (and recommend adoption).
joan
October 25th, 2010 at 4:25 pm
What I said is that this dispute should remain between the daughter and her parents, period, without a meddling third party. If the girl can convince her parents to let her go through with the pregnancy, then that’s fine; if not, the simple reality of the situation is that this is a minor child who is living under the roof of her parents and relies on them for her financial support. They shouldn’t have to physically force her to have an abortion; it should be as simple as saying that either she voluntarily goes through with the procedure or she can no longer rely on them for support.
And if the girl asked the third party to get involved, to defend her from her parents’ abuse and coercion, is that okay then? She’s allowed to do that, right?
Threat of financial abandonment by parents of a minor child is coercion. What’s more, a parent abandoning their responsibility toward their minor child is neglect and abandonment.
But let’s say, just for kicks and giggles, that you did have a point. We’ll pretend that “As long as you remain under my roof, you will abide by my rules” extended to the right to force people to have abortions (which, by the by, if this were true under current law, would also enable her parents to force her to pierce her ears, get an appendectomy, and tattoo her belly-button, but that is another argument). In that case, the solution is not to drag her bodily into an abortion clinic, throw her against the intake counter, and demand that her child be killed. The solution is that she move out!
Also, your whole, “it’s okay for Planned Parenthood to enable minors to obtain abortions without parental consent even when that’s required by law because that situation is COMPLEATLY DIFFERENT!!!” argument is total bunk. If parental consent is not required to get an abortion, parental consent is not required to not-get one, either. You can’t have it both ways.
“Joan, do you really think a parent should be able to force their child to have an abortion?”
No, and as I said above, the mother here should not literally physically force her daughter to abort; if it’s true that she was physically dragging her daughter to the clinic, that was wrong of her. However, it’s entirely within her rights to make it completely clear that she will not provide material support up to and including housing to her daughter if she does take this course of action.
“In some states it is against the law to coerce someone to get an abortion. They are called no coercion bills. In fact in our state Joan(the one we share) I was called to testify for the bill.”
Really? Which states? How do these states define “coercion” for that purpose? Is Texas one of these states?
Of course, I think I already know the answer to that: no, it’s not, or you would have said so. So bringing up “coercion laws” is really kind of irrelevant, isn’t it?
thanks for clearing that up. I suppose, as a matter of “rights,” the mother could make it completely clear that she would not provide any material support. I think the better course of action would be a bit more loving.
“And if the girl asked the third party to get involved, to defend her from her parents’ abuse and coercion, is that okay then? She’s allowed to do that, right? Since you seem to be the one who arbits “okay” from “not okay.””
The fact still stands that this organization is inserting itself into a place it has no business upon the request of a minor child attempting to overrule her legal parents.
“Threat of financial abandonment by parents of a minor child is coercion. What’s more, a parent abandoning their responsibility toward their minor child is neglect and abandonment.
But let’s say, just for kicks and giggles, that you did have a point. We’ll pretend that “As long as you remain under my roof, you will abide by my rules” extended to the right to force people to have abortions (which, by the by, if this were true under current law, would also enable her parents to force her to pierce her ears, get an appendectomy, and tattoo her belly-button, but that is another argument). In that case, the solution is not to drag her bodily into an abortion clinic, throw her against the intake counter, and demand that her child be killed. The solution is that she move out!”
Giving birth is grounds in most states for a minor to be legally emancipated at the request of the minor or the parent. There are, of course, other possibilities for a parent to voluntarily relinquish custody of a minor child. Besides which, the girl here is already 16 years old, meaning she is less than 2 years away from the age of majority as it is; a simple enough threat to throw her out of the house at age 18 would possibly suffice for the purpose at hand.
“Also, your whole, “it’s okay for Planned Parenthood to enable minors to obtain abortions without parental consent even when that’s required by law because that situation is COMPLEATLY DIFFERENT!!!” argument is total bunk. If parental consent is not required to get an abortion, parental consent is not required to not-get one, either. You can’t have it both ways.”
Parental consent laws are on shaky enough constitutional grounds as it is. They have been struck down many times and in many different jurisdictions.
“thanks for clearing that up. I suppose, as a matter of “rights,” the mother could make it completely clear that she would not provide any material support. I think the better course of action would be a bit more loving.”
I wouldn’t personally want to see it come to that either, but using it as a viable threat makes sense to me, because I do ultimately feel that going through with this pregnancy will harm the girl’s quality of life in any number of ways, even if she doesn’t understand that.
The fact still stands that this organization is inserting itself into a place it has no business upon the request of a minor child attempting to overrule her legal parents.
It didn’t insert itself if it was asked to come. Is it okay for her to ask for outside help or not? This is a yes or no question.
Giving birth is grounds in most states for a minor to be legally emancipated at the request of the minor or the parent. There are, of course, other possibilities for a parent to voluntarily relinquish custody of a minor child.
None of which the parents tried. While those recourses might exist, these parents would have had to go to them for you to defend their actions on those grounds.
Besides which, the girl here is already 16 years old, meaning she is less than 2 years away from the age of majority as it is; a simple enough threat to throw her out of the house at age 18 would possibly suffice for the purpose at hand.
She’s seventeen. But at least you are calling the threats what they are now.
Parental consent laws are on shaky enough constitutional grounds as it is. They have been struck down many times and in many different states.
Which goes back to my point*. You think that parental consent is unnecessary to get an abortion. That requires it to be unnecessary to not-get one as well. You can not have it both ways, even if you really, really want to.
* Abortion being wrong regardless of whether or not you have a note from your parents saying it’s okay, it makes perfect sense for pro-lifers to support Parental Consent Laws, not because some parents will permit abortions but because some other parents won’t. Since our arguments about this situation are predicated elsewhere, your attempt at a “NO U!” here (by trying to argue unconstitutionality, which is both subject-changing and incredibly debatable) is humorous, but misaimed.
The fact still stands that this organization is inserting itself into a place it has no business upon the request of a minor child attempting to overrule her legal parents.
So, a minor seeking judicial bypass in a state where parental consent/notification is required for an abortion is not ok with you?
“It didn’t insert itself if it was asked to come. Is it okay for her to ask for outside help or not? This is a yes or no question.”
It did insert itself. It voluntarily acted of its own accord to enter as a third party into a dispute between a minor child and her parents, and that is a fact, regardless of whether the minor requested it or not, and whether it was “okay” for her to do that.
“None of which the parents tried. While those recourses might exist, these parents would have had to go to them for you to defend their actions on those grounds.”
Of course they haven’t tried it. I would assume the parents don’t want it to come to that in the first place. The simple fact that those options are open to them is enough to justify “coercing” their daughter with the threat to avail themselves of those courses of action.
“Which goes back to my point*. You think that parental consent is unnecessary to get an abortion. That requires it to be unnecessary to not-get one as well. You can not have it both ways, even if you really, really want to.”
No it doesn’t. An abortion is a one-time procedure that terminates a pregnancy and thus any further obligations that would be associated with it. By contrast, not having an abortion and instead going through with a pregnancy necessarily incurs medical bills and other costs and obligations on the minor’s parents, who are still legally responsible for their daughter. The “parental consent” here literally has to do with consenting to take on additional legal obligations that wouldn’t exist following a termination of pregnancy.
I am now firmly convinced that Joan is actually pro-life, but makes such ridiculous comments to make pro-choicers look bad.
Firmly convinced.
Uh, Vannah, proaborts don’t need joan’s help to look bad.
Kel
October 25th, 2010 at 4:14 pm
This girl is young and dumb and doesn’t understand the responsibility of being a parent; she just wants a new toy.
Oh, but surely in her comprehensive sex ed class they told her how one is probably not ready for sex if one is not ready to accept responsibility of parenting? Right?
Oh Kel, that just made me laugh. Thanks! :)
And while some people think there is no ramification to an abortion (and even tout it as being a money-saver) this is a permanent action that can not be taken back.
Again – when a woman wakes up (possibly years later) and realizes that she indeed caused harm to someone -… caused that human’s death. What do you think any ramification would be? Depression? Remorse? Anything?
So again – if we allow abortion – the purposeful death of another human – for reasons such as economics – is that moral? Does that fit in a loving society? Is that the finest hour for human beings?
Okay Joan, you win. Nobody has the right to insert themselves into a situation where a pregnant woman is being dragged by the hair to abortion chambers. Nobody has the right or obligation to step up and assist her as she is being coerced, which is a violation of all medical ethics (I ignored your ignorant rejoinder earlier).
Nobody has the right to insert themselves between an abusive parent and the child/young woman being victimized. Nobody should bring such matters to the attention of the courts. Let the kid rot. To hell with her. Serves her right for tramping around. That’s your position Joan, and you’re the most enlightened person here at Jill’s site. We owe you a great debt of honor for the moral clarity, legal acumen, and humanitarian vision that you’ve brought to this situation. Your lesson is clear and well-received: we are not our brother’s keeper.
You’ve managed to demonstrate that none of the pro-lifers here, the body of established biomedical ethics, or the legal system seem to be able to get it right. You’re Planned Parenthood’s cover girl for next month, a richly deserved accolade.
Thank you Joan. I’ll never forget that the right to choose or the rights of a murderous parent trump love and life. You are truly inspirational.
Vannah and Praxedes,
Let’s just agree that every day for Joan is April 1st, and hope that she goes back under the bridge! ;)
Really? Which states? How do these states define “coercion” for that purpose? Is Texas one of these states?
Of course, I think I already know the answer to that: no, it’s not, or you would have said so. So bringing up “coercion laws” is really kind of irrelevant, isn’t it?
Hi again Joan.
Here is the WI No Coercion bill
http://www.wrtl.org/pdf/CoercionLegisAnalysis052107.pdf
I believe Tennessee, North Dakota, Texas, Georgia and Missouri also have them. Still looking. Not that Joanie cares but there are others reading that believe it is perfectly fine to force or coerce a woman to have an abortion.
It’s not.
Vannah,
Joan is proabortion. She is fine with the one child policy of China. Read the quote of the day comments. Well I am assuming Joan is a woman and a proabort. Hard to say if she is a real person.
:) I confess, I hadn’t thought of the “internet virus” theory to explain Joan. Hmm… another sub-category for the ever-expanding troll taxonomy: “Virtual Troll”. The mind boggles…
Ohio has a non-coercion law. Ohio law requires the following sign to be posted in any clinic or office where abortions are performed.
“NO ONE CAN FORCE YOU TO HAVE AN ABORTION.
NO ONE — NOT A PARENT, NOT A HUSBAND, NOT A BOYFRIEND — NO ONE.
Under Ohio law, an abortion cannot be legally performed on anyone, regardless of her age, unless she VOLUNTARILY CONSENTS to having the abortion.
Ohio law requires that, before an abortion can legally be performed, the pregnant female must sign a form indicating that she consents to having the abortion “voluntarily” and “WITHOUT COERCION BY ANY PERSON.”
IF SOMEONE IS TRYING TO FORCE YOU TO HAVE AN ABORTION AGAINST YOUR WILL:
DO NOT SIGN THE CONSENT FORM
IF YOU ARE AT AN ABORTION FACILITY, TELL AN EMPLOYEE OF THE FACILITY THAT SOMEONE IS TRYING TO FORCE YOU TO HAVE AN ABORTION.”
joan
October 25th, 2010 at 2:48 pm
“This girl wants to carry her baby to term. She doesn’t want an abortion. The father of the child doesn’t want the abortion either.”
Of course they don’t want an abortion. They’re not going to be on the hook for the baby, financially; their parents will be. This girl is young and dumb and doesn’t understand the responsibility of being a parent; she just wants a new toy. That’s all it is to her; a doll.
Oh yes Joan, I was a mom at the tender age of 15 (hear that 15!) and for some odd reason I worked hard, fought hard & loved myself and my son HARDER; and I made it, I did it, well and still am.
My son is now 8 and I have two other children. I’m married (to my son’s father, you know the one I had at 15), we’re both educated, both working & both loving each other and our children more each day.
I came from a life of abuse, I know what its like living without heat, water….
I went from a wild child and blossomed into a mother, at 15.
I don’t care what anyone says, becoming a mother at 15 or 35 its still hard.
Please, give me break on this whole ‘she’s too young to have a kid’…blah, blah, blah.
Oh and Joan,
Financial abandonment is a bunch of crap.
CPC’s are a God send to a lot of women who find themselves in an unplanned pregnancy situation. They sure helped me a lot.
Also I worked as a cashier (oh and yes we had food stamps for about 12 months as I recall) and my husband worked in contruction. We both got degree’s and went into our chosen career fields.
Gez, under your rule my mother would have really been able to make me abort! And I was about 26 weeks pregnant when I ‘found out’ I was pregnant (ok, I was in denial until 26 weeks)
My doctor and my mom both said ‘its not to late to get it taken care of’….oh that line still gives me chills up my spine
AK,
YOU GO GIRL!!! RAWWWWRRRRRRRRRRR!
Glad to have you back!! I am so proud of you!!
Oh I see how it goes: a young woman is an independent, empowered, individual when it comes to making decisions about sexuality and reproductive health, should she chosse terminate her pregnancy; but if she chooses to carry to term, sudenly she’s young and stupid and incapable of making sound decisions. Condenscending much? How about hypocritical.
“They’re not going to be on the hook for the baby, financially; their parents will be. This girl is young and dumb and doesn’t understand the responsibility of being a parent; she just wants a new toy. That’s all it is to her; a doll.”
Yout can not possibly know this. I had my first child at 17 during my freshman year of college. Guess what? My mother never provided a penny towards raising any of my children aside from normal birthday/Christmas gifts. My husband and I (and yes, we got married when I was 17) have fully supported our family since we found out I was pregnant. I didn’t want “a new toy” or “a doll.” I wanted my child to live. We thought we had lost him several times and I bled for 20 weeks. Then my water broke at 22 weeks and I was on hospital bed rest for another 7. The whole time all I could do was pray that he would be ok. My son was born weighing 2lbs, 4 oz and has needed 4 surgeries and daily shots. Yet, again, I have taken care of him with no help from my mother.
Aside from all of that, it should be blatantly obvious that YOU CAN NOT FORCE SOMEONE ELSE TO ABORT. Glad to know you truely are anti-life.
Joan – what has happened to harden your heart so much?
I don’t feel you would answer – but I pray, and encourage others on this thread to join me, that you might be healed by the One whose grace, compassion and mercy are endless, but whose justice is absolute.
I’m convinced there’s a thickened scar covering over a wound in your heart so deep you’re numb to what it feels like to love someone else without judging them.
Words and arguments on a website are not at the heart of your distress. Neither is it your demands for justice in this particular case.
God loves you as his child, but he respects and honors you too much to drag you into heaven.
May He have far greater compassion and mercy upon you than you are showing to this young lady.
Lauren: Is that your son in your Gravatar picture? He’s really cute! :D
Joan – what has happened to harden your heart so much?
That’s what I’m getting really curious about. We’re looking at a seriously damaged human being here.
Yes Carla, I’m back!
I’ve been out of the internet for a while (was living out in the Chatanika, Alaska area, google it lol) and the only internet there was sattelite….super spendy.
Maruader, that’s actally my youngest son, but thanks!
“Obviously the girl’s family cannot withstand the burden of their daughter going through with an unwanted pregnancy and ending up with another mouth to feed, especially in this economic climate…”
What do you mean “obviously”? Unless you are reading a different article about this case, there is nothing at all to suggest the girl`s parents want her to abort for economic reasons. Even if this is true, it is a dumb arguement. Are others allowed to drag a pregnant mother by the hair to an abortion clinic when their wallets are at risk, or just the grandparents of the fetus? What about the father of the fetus who would be forced to pay child support? Can we as taxpayers haul a poor woman to Planned Parenthood against her will? After all, when the child is born and goes on welfare, we will suffer the financial burden.
“This girl is young and dumb and doesn’t understand the responsibility of being a parent; she just wants a new toy. That’s all it is to her; a doll.”
Again, why in the world would you assume this? You do not know her. And actually, it is pro-choice women that want dolls. You know, like women who kill their fetuses with Down Syndrome because they cannot stand anything less than a perfect BABY DOLL to show off. This girl has gone through hell to keep her offspring alive; she is already a better parent than those who kill their kids when the going gets tough.