Aurora Planned Parenthood triggers parental notice uprising

Thanks, Planned Parenthood, seriously.

Backdrop: The State of IL passed a parental notice bill in 1995 that laid dormant for over a decade because the then-liberal IL Supreme Court refused to enact rules so a minor girl in an abusive home could instead get permission from the courts.

lisa%202.jpgIn 2006 a constitutionally friendly Supreme Court wrote rules and instructed rabidly pro-abort Attorney General Lisa Madigan to enact the law, which, of course, she dragged her feet on throughout early 2007.

Finally in May 2007, Madigan completed her part, and since then the decision whether to enact the law has been in the hands of notoriously slow federal judge David Coar. The ACLU is disputing whether IL court systems are prepared.

Then Planned Parenthood Aurora reared its ugly head in late July and opened for business in early October, despite huge outcry from citizens.

With parental notice now necessary to protect Aurora families, last week by unanimous vote the Aurora City Council passed a resolution submitted by alderman Rick Lawrence calling on the state to do something....

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Aurora, Illinois urges that the State of Illinois aggressively work with the Attorney General and the courts to resolve the issues involved so that implementation of the Parental Notification Act of 1995 can immediately proceed. Furthermore, we notify neighboring municipalities to be concerned about the same and hereby approve this resolution as fore stated.

Read the full resolution at OpenLineBlog.

With the 2nd largest city in IL passing such a resolution, its 3rd largest city, Naperville, is planning to introduce the same as early as tonight, according to OLB:

Now, city leaders in Naperville are preparing to move forward as well, which makes sense considering the Planned Parenthood facility happens to be between the two cities with a combined metropolitan population of over 400,000 people.

Naperville Councilmen Dick Furstenau and Darlene Senger are both planning to introduce their own parental notification resolution to further push this matter into prime-time focus of everyone in the State of Illinois and U.S. District Court Judge David Coar's courtroom to get action on protecting children.

The matter could be introduced as early as next week's meeting on Tuesday, December 4th and voted upon during the December 18th meeting.

Hopefully more municipalities will follow suit.

[Sun-Times Madigan photo credit: McHenry County Blog]


Comments:

The newspaper is saying, "Madigan wants to enforce a law...."

That doesn't sound like somebody who is "rabidly for abortion."

If the legislators and the courts have set the deal then I don't think it's right that individuals drag their feet on it.

The question of how to best serve minor girls in abusive homes remains.

Doug

Posted by: Doug at December 4, 2007 8:15 AM


Did you notice the wording? "Pregnant women under 18". Not teenagers, not minors, not girls...

Posted by: Milehimama at December 4, 2007 8:45 AM


Doug, that was either MSM spin, or giving MSM the benefit of the doubt, a lack of understanding of the nuances.

In reality, here's what happened at that January hearing and then the May hearing:

Instead of simply asking... Judge David Coar to lift the injunction, she asked him to appoint a "special master" to investigate whether, and then advise as to when, the Illinois court clerks were prepared to implement the bypass rules.

Judge Coar refused this bizarre request.... Meanwhile, the Thomas More Society obtained a transcript of what occurred before Judge Coar and sent it to Chief Justice Thomas. The Chief Justice promptly took matters into his own hands. In a directive which all seven Supreme Court Justices signed, they told Attorney General Madigan that what she told Judge Coar was "in error," and ordered her to enforce the law. She then asked Judge Coar to lift the injunction.

http://www.prolifeaction.org/news/2007v26n1/illinois.htm

Posted by: Jill Stanek at December 4, 2007 8:45 AM


Thanks, Jill - it didn't all add up as stated. It does seem like bizarre foot-dragging.

Posted by: Doug at December 4, 2007 9:06 AM


Mom at 5280 feet, perhaps a decent question is when is a girl woman enough to make her own best choice?

Posted by: Doug at December 4, 2007 9:07 AM


I have joyful news: Pendergraft lost his license!

Here's the story!

If you don't know who Pendergraft is, he's the abortion tycoon that owned the facility that killed baby Rowan and refused to call for help when he was born alive.

Our prayers are working, y'all!

Posted by: Jacqueline at December 4, 2007 9:29 AM


Praise the Lord!

Posted by: Bobby Bambino at December 4, 2007 9:31 AM


I KNOW! I haven't prayed for him in a few years (I kind of just forgot about him) and look at this now.

He's back on my prayer list. He needs to repent- for serious.

Posted by: Jacqueline at December 4, 2007 9:57 AM


Doug,

Mom at 5280 feet, perhaps a decent question is when is a girl woman enough to make her own best choice?

When she's old enough to accept responsibility for her actions.

Posted by: mk at December 4, 2007 10:01 AM


Doug,

Have you ever used the phrase "That's not fair"?

Posted by: mk at December 4, 2007 10:02 AM


Emotional maturity levels among girls/women vary.

However. The law holds parents accountable for their children as long as they are minors, unless they are emancipated. A "minor" is defined, in the law, as a child under the age of 18.

And Doug, what's with the misogyny? When is she "woman enough"? Is there some point when a female is "not enough woman" for you?

Posted by: Milehimama at December 4, 2007 11:23 AM


Doug,

Most state laws do not allow people under 18 to drink, smoke, stay out past 11 o'clock, drive, consent to medical treatment or even excuse themselves from a day of school when they are ill. In general, the state legislators do not think that they are competent to make any other decision that an adult can make. Why is abortion held to a lower standard than any other medical decision? Why is birth control the only medical decision a minor is allowed to make? There has to be some reason that someone under 18 hasn't even acheived the legal authority to call in sick to school for herself on the day she has an abortion or goes to the doctor to get contraception.

People on this board were incredulous when I suggested that teens be treated like adults. There is no movement in society to lower the age of majortity. Quite the opposite. Folks who tally up teen pregnancy statistics include even adults of 18 and 19. Why should they be so concerned about legal adults having babies? I think it is because in some way they don't believe they are competent to be parents. Yet many of these people would say that those years younger are competent to make a decision to have an abortion. These are people who can't even get a credit card. There is no evidence that folks in our society trust the judgement of teens on much of anything.

Posted by: hippe at December 4, 2007 11:37 AM


Hippe wrote:

"There is no evidence that folks in our society trust the judgement of teens on much of anything."


And there's good reason that teens' judgment is not fully trusted. Their brains are still developing.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,314601,00.html

Posted by: Jamesr at December 4, 2007 12:28 PM


"perhaps a decent question is when is a girl woman enough to make her own best choice?"

MK: When she's old enough to accept responsibility for her actions.

She's certainly doing that, the problem being if one or more parents is going against the girl's interests.

And, MK - of course I've said "that's not fair" before, you betcha.

Doug

Posted by: Doug at December 4, 2007 5:48 PM


MileHiMama: The law holds parents accountable for their children as long as they are minors, unless they are emancipated. A "minor" is defined, in the law, as a child under the age of 18.

Okay, and in the rare cases where the parents are going against what is best for the child, then IMO the kid should be emancipated from their influence, in the specific situation at least. If there is a mechanism for judicial bypass, etc., then fine with me.
......

And Doug, what's with the misogyny? When is she "woman enough"? Is there some point when a female is "not enough woman" for you?

[insert rolling eyes here]

No misogyny - I was referring to what you said, "Pregnant women under 18".

If you think the wording sounds strange, then I guess there is a point where "woman" applies. Depends on the individual and of course also on just what we're talking about - appearance, judgment, etc.

Doug

Posted by: Doug at December 4, 2007 5:59 PM


James,

You wrote,

And there's good reason that teens' judgment is not fully trusted. Their brains are still developing.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,314601,00.html

Posted by: Jamesr at December 4, 2007 12:28 PM

There are new brain imaging studies that researchers are "interpreting" to mean that teens are not responsible. However, educational and behavioral psychologists have measured performance on cognitive tasks requirie various levels of reasoning. They tested teens, people in their 20's and 30's and could not find any increase in cognitive ability beyond the age of 15.

Posted by: hippie at December 4, 2007 6:09 PM


Hippie: Most state laws do not allow people under 18 to drink, smoke, stay out past 11 o'clock, drive, consent to medical treatment or even excuse themselves from a day of school when they are ill. In general, the state legislators do not think that they are competent to make any other decision that an adult can make. Why is abortion held to a lower standard than any other medical decision? Why is birth control the only medical decision a minor is allowed to make? There has to be some reason that someone under 18 hasn't even acheived the legal authority to call in sick to school for herself on the day she has an abortion or goes to the doctor to get contraception.

Hippie, I'd say that actually kids are allowed to make decisions as do adults, in the main, among all our choices and actions. It's only a relative fewer areas where the state makes rules for adults or kids, in the first place. It's a fairly rare situation where there will be a conflict between kids and parents over continuing or ending pregnancies, a much different situation than with tattoos, etc. If anything I'd say that abortion is seen differently by society, i.e. if little Jenny wants a tattoo but Mom & Dad say "no," then society isn't all that worried over Jenny, there, while parents who want to force a girl to end or continue a pregnancy against the girl's will is seen as a much bigger deal, and rightly so, IMO.
......

People on this board were incredulous when I suggested that teens be treated like adults. There is no movement in society to lower the age of majortity. Quite the opposite. Folks who tally up teen pregnancy statistics include even adults of 18 and 19. Why should they be so concerned about legal adults having babies? I think it is because in some way they don't believe they are competent to be parents. Yet many of these people would say that those years younger are competent to make a decision to have an abortion. These are people who can't even get a credit card. There is no evidence that folks in our society trust the judgement of teens on much of anything.

Who, really, is so concerned about 18 and 19 year olds having babies (as long as they want to)? With the whole parental notification or consent deal, I'm looking at situations that are definitely not the norm - ones where I think somebody else should be empowered to look at it and at least recommend that a judge be consulted, etc.

In the great majority of cases I think that teens should indeed be treated like adults as far as being allowed the own choice of ending or continuing pregnancies.

Doug

Posted by: Doug at December 4, 2007 6:23 PM


This parental notification law is a BAD LAW because it regulates abortion.

Any law that says "...and then you can kill the baby" is an evil law despite what NRTL or AUL lawyers say.

Posted by: zeke13:19 at December 4, 2007 6:37 PM


you tell em Zeke.

parental notification is evil evil evil

Posted by: hal at December 4, 2007 8:40 PM


Every time I see that picture of Lisa Madigan, my brain goes "Jodie Foster."

Posted by: Doug at December 4, 2007 9:40 PM


Doug,

you wrote,

It's a fairly rare situation where there will be a conflict between kids and parents over continuing or ending pregnancies

______________________________________

No offense, but how can you possibly know if there is conflict or not, let alone how prevalent it is?

Posted by: Anonymous at December 4, 2007 9:54 PM



In the great majority of cases I think that teens should indeed be treated like adults as far as being allowed the own choice of ending or continuing pregnancies.

Doug

Posted by: Doug at December 4, 2007 6:23 PM

Why is that as far as it goes? If she can make life and death decisions, why can't she enlist in the military, work more than 20 hours a week, sign for a loan, rent an apartment, drink alcohol, get a driver's license.

Would you let a 15 year old borrow your car? If not, why not? Don't you trust her judgement with your car?

Would you let a 15 year old join the military and vote? Since she knows what is best for her, shouldn't she be allowed to shape public policy by voting?

I think most people who want young women to "choose" really hope they will choose abortion because they don't trust their judgement not because they do. Furthermore if she isn't a mother she can go on to do something with her life that society will approve of because they sure don't approve of her being a mom.

Posted by: hippie at December 4, 2007 10:07 PM


Doug,

Do you think a 15 year old should be able to call in sick to school on the day she goes for the abortion? or is she not mature enough for the school to take her word for it? Should the school only take her word for it as far as abortion? or should she be able to call in sick for herself if she has been vomiting from the flu?

Posted by: hippie at December 4, 2007 10:16 PM


Something is drastically WRONG, when, as has been said numerous times, that parents must give permission for schools to dispense ASPIRIN to their children, but that same CHILD can have an abortion w/o her parents knowledge.

WHAT is happening to our society that we permit children to have INVASIVE, DANGEROUS reproductive surgery WITHOUT parental consent, yet demand to know if the school nurse is going to dispense one harmless aspirin tablet???

Anyone with a sixth grade education can figure out how skewed this "logic" is. Oh sure, let's just take Samantha to the nearest abortion clinic, shove a HIGH POWERED vacuum cleaner hose up inside her uterus and suck out the baby...then send her home in two hours...but GOD FORBID she get sick at school the next day from "complications" and have the nurse not be able to give her an aspirin....

It's NO WONDER so many parents are opting for home schooling. I would be terrified to send my child to a public school and have everything I've taught them be undermined by the radical liberals who think nothing of exposing kids to things about sex and reproduction without my consent.

This country has done nothing but allow radical liberals to run our schools, poison our innocent children's minds, and promote freedom for them to do anything they damn well please and to undermine the rights of parents.

Planned Parenthood needs to be eliminated immediately...in all cities, in all states. Then, parents need to start taking a MORE ACTIVE roll in raising their children, and not leave it to school officials, nannies, babysitters, ad nauseum.

It's time for parents to forego their desire for material possessions like bigger homes, better cars, vacations, etc. and wake up to the fact that their kids are gaining nothing from any of it, and that we are producing a generation of kids who view everything that was once immoral to now be acceptable and politically correct.

Let's just sit back and allow our kids to be taught that pre-marital sex is good, that abortion is ok and easy, and that God and morals aren't important anymore. If it feels good, do it.

Yeah...that'll solve everything.

Posted by: Mike at December 4, 2007 10:25 PM


No offense, but how can you possibly know if there is conflict or not, let alone how prevalent it is?

None taken; it's just a fact that there are some cases, admittedly rare, where one or more parents would force their kid one way or another against their will.

Posted by: Doug at December 4, 2007 10:31 PM


Hippie: Why is that as far as it goes? If she can make life and death decisions, why can't she enlist in the military, work more than 20 hours a week, sign for a loan, rent an apartment, drink alcohol, get a driver's license.

She doesn't have to be able to drive to know whether she wants to continue a pregnancy or not. If a 12 year old girl doesn't want to have a baby, then in no way am I for forcing her to continue the pregnancy. Doesn't mean I think she'd make a good soldier.
......

Would you let a 15 year old borrow your car? If not, why not? Don't you trust her judgement with your car?

Depends on if it was legal for them to drive, and it depends on the individual. The odds are against it. There are some 30 year olds I wouldn't loan a car to, yet just as with the 15 year old, they know darn well if they want to have a baby or not.
......

Would you let a 15 year old join the military and vote? Since she knows what is best for her, shouldn't she be allowed to shape public policy by voting?

Heck, raise the voting age to 25.... Really has nought to do with wanting to be pregnant or not.
.......

I think most people who want young women to "choose" really hope they will choose abortion because they don't trust their judgement not because they do. Furthermore if she isn't a mother she can go on to do something with her life that society will approve of because they sure don't approve of her being a mom.

Then they're really not Pro-Choice.

Posted by: Doug at December 4, 2007 10:43 PM


Do you think a 15 year old should be able to call in sick to school on the day she goes for the abortion? or is she not mature enough for the school to take her word for it? Should the school only take her word for it as far as abortion? or should she be able to call in sick for herself if she has been vomiting from the flu?

Would kids sometimes lie about being sick? You're darn skippy they would. I trust them to know whether they want to remain pregnant or not though. I would also respect the girl's privacy - the school doesn't have to know her reason; perhaps Saturdays would be best, there.

Posted by: Doug at December 4, 2007 10:49 PM


Doug,

She doesn't have to be able to drive to know whether she wants to continue a pregnancy or not. If a 12 year old girl doesn't want to have a baby, then in no way am I for forcing her to continue the pregnancy. Doesn't mean I think she'd make a good soldier.
.....................................................

The question isn't what she wants, the question is whether she is legally competent to choose.

If a 12 year old wants to risk her life serving in the military, why shouldn't she be allowed to make that call. She knows whether or not she wants to serve. Why isn't her judgement with her life good enough for you? Why is your opinion of her abilities germaine to her right to enlist? It is her body, why not her decision? Why is she legally prevented from controlling what she does?

Posted by: hippie at December 4, 2007 10:53 PM



Would kids sometimes lie about being sick? You're darn skippy they would. I trust them to know whether they want to remain pregnant or not though. I would also respect the girl's privacy - the school doesn't have to know her reason; perhaps Saturdays would be best, there.

Posted by: Doug at December 4, 2007 10:49 PM

So what if she skips? It is her life. She is not hurting anyone. Why can't she skip if she wants to? Why is she legally prevented from making her own decision?

Posted by: Anonymous at December 4, 2007 10:56 PM


It's not her judgment that determines her ability to soldier. I don't want her in the military and I don't think the military wants her in either. I don't doubt that some kids want to be soldiers, nor that some don't, but that doesn't change anything. I wouldn't want the military telling her what to do with her pregnancy, and I don't want 12 year olds on the battlefield.

Heck, if the 12 year old wants to be a professional basketball player, are they going to make a good one?

Posted by: Doug at December 4, 2007 11:31 PM


Doug,

Why wouldn't she be welcomed by the military? Why wouldn't she make a good soldier? Do you doubt her competence? if so why?

Posted by: hippie at December 4, 2007 11:44 PM


So what if she skips? It is her life. She is not hurting anyone. Why can't she skip if she wants to? Why is she legally prevented from making her own decision?

Who really wants kids to not go to school?

Posted by: Doug at December 4, 2007 11:46 PM



Who really wants kids to not go to school?

Posted by: Doug at December 4, 2007 11:46 PM

Who really wants kids to make their own medical decisions?

Is she competent to decide or not?

Is it for you to decide what her educational goals should be? Or any other personal decision she makes? Why isn't she allowed to make any of the decisions I listed earlier? Is it because we don't like what she might choose, so we choose for her?

If she is so competent to decide things why is abortion the only decision folks would allow her? Not alcohol, not driving, not even choosing not to attend school.

Who cares if you don't want her to skip school? It is her life and her decision. What right does society have to force her? What right have her parents?

Posted by: Anonymous at December 4, 2007 11:53 PM


Why is she legally prevented from making her own decision?

Who really wants kids to not go to school?

Posted by: Doug at December 4, 2007 11:46 PM

I didn't ask about what you or society expects her to do regarding her education.

I asked why she is not allowed to make the decision.

Posted by: hippie at December 4, 2007 11:56 PM


Why wouldn't she be welcomed by the military? Why wouldn't she make a good soldier? Do you doubt her competence? if so why?

Hippie, of course I doubt her competence to be a soldier, just as the military does. I don't need to tell you why the military wouldn't welcome her, the U.S. military, anyway.

Ability is one thing, and desire is another. I could likely tell you why a given 12 year old wouldn't make a good parent, too. That's still ability, though, not desire.

I don't want 12 year olds forced into military service nor to remain pregnant against their will.


Posted by: Doug at December 4, 2007 11:59 PM


Hippie: I asked why she is not allowed to make the decision.

And the answer is that society doesn't want kids opting out of school on their own before a given age.

Posted by: Doug at December 5, 2007 12:02 AM


opting means choosing.

They don't want her to choose what she wants.

Why can't she choose? Why does society get to force its will on her?

Posted by: hippie at December 5, 2007 12:10 AM


What if society doesn't want kids opting out of pregnancy on their own before a given age?

Posted by: hippie at December 5, 2007 12:15 AM


Who really wants kids to make their own medical decisions?

Depends on what we're talking about, there.
.......


If she is so competent to decide things why is abortion the only decision folks would allow her? Not alcohol, not driving, not even choosing not to attend school.

You seem to want to view all things as the same, while they most certainly are not.

"Folks" don't interfere with most actions and decisions in her life, i.e. freedom is the norm, not restriction.

Nobody is saying she would necessarily be a competent driver. In fact, society doesn't want her driving before a given age, and the same for drinking, opting out of school, being a police officer, or a pan-galactic straw boss, for that matter.


Who cares if you don't want her to skip school?

What is operative is that just about everybody doesn't want her to skip school. There is sufficient opinion for the rules to be that kids go to school. If it was just me not wanting her to skip, she'd likely not have to go to school.

Posted by: Doug at December 5, 2007 12:27 AM


What if society doesn't want kids opting out of pregnancy on their own before a given age?

Then society is gonna say "don't do it" the same as for skipping school.
......

They don't want her to choose what she wants.

No, they don't want her to do a given thing.
......

Why can't she choose? Why does society get to force its will on her?

Because society says so.


Posted by: Doug at December 5, 2007 12:33 AM


Doug,

I don't want 12 year olds forced into military service

Posted by: Doug at December 4, 2007 11:59 PM

I clearly said if she wants to. I was not talking about forcing her into the military. Why doesn't the military want any 12 year old females? Not even big strong, athletic smart ones? Why?

Posted by: Anonymous at December 5, 2007 12:34 AM


"I don't want 12 year olds forced into military service nor to remain pregnant against their will."

I clearly said if she wants to. I was not talking about forcing her into the military.

It's still up to the military to take her or not, as well as to society to say she stays in school, doesn't go to the Russian front, etc. If we're not forcing her against her will, then fine by me. That doesn't mean we have to let her into the tank corps or the astronauts' guild.
.......

Why doesn't the military want any 12 year old females? Not even big strong, athletic smart ones? Why?

Some militaries would take 'em.... As for ours, if the 12 year old is big and strong and fast enough, and smart enough to fool the recruitment officer, then who knows...?

That's saying nothing about the rather sticky problem of parents, guardians, the dreaded vice-principal, etc.

Posted by: Doug at December 5, 2007 12:58 AM



Why can't she choose? Why does society get to force its will on her?

Because society says so.

Posted by: Doug at December 5, 2007 12:33 AM

This is pure caprice. She isn't interfering with anyone else.

So her opinion counts for nothing. Why?

Society gets to tell people what to do for no reason, just because society says so. No justification. No freedom of choice. No rights of the individual. Just because we say so.

Do you really defend that she is forced to do something "because society says so" logic.

That is profoundly lame, unamerican, and simply not the real reason society mandates school attendance. Question is what is the reason? What is its basis and how does it relate to the age of majority, and the freedom to choose whether to attend school?

Posted by: hippie at December 5, 2007 1:00 AM


That doesn't mean we have to let her into the tank corps or the astronauts' guild

Why wouldn't they be clamoring to get her in the tank corps or the astronaut program? Don't you think she would be good enough?

Posted by: Anonymous at December 5, 2007 1:03 AM



Why can't she choose? Why does society get to force its will on her?

Because society says so.

Posted by: Doug at December 5, 2007 12:33 AM

Who can argue with such logic?

This has to be my fav. from you.

Anyway, why does society say so?

Why not trust the judgment of those who just don't want it?

Posted by: Anonymous at December 5, 2007 1:07 AM


sorry I forgot name. those last couple were from me.

okay good nignt.

Posted by: hippie at December 5, 2007 1:10 AM


Why can't she choose? Why does society get to force its will on her?

"Because society says so."

This is pure caprice. She isn't interfering with anyone else.

Hippie, it's really the way things work, your thoughts of "caprice" notwithstanding. No, she isn't interfering with anyone else, but "we" (society) still want her in school enough that we mandate it.
......


So her opinion counts for nothing. Why?

I didn't say it doesn't count, but it doesn't outweigh society's desire for her to be in school.
......


Society gets to tell people what to do for no reason, just because society says so. No justification. No freedom of choice. No rights of the individual. Just because we say so.

I imagine you can figure out the justification on your own.
......


Do you really defend that she is forced to do something "because society says so" logic.

Well, you asked why she can't choose. It's because society does not see the greatest good being served by allowing her to skip school. In this matter society does in effect say "you're goin' to school."
......

That is profoundly lame, unamerican, and simply not the real reason society mandates school attendance. Question is what is the reason? What is its basis and how does it relate to the age of majority, and the freedom to choose whether to attend school?

"American" or not doesn't matter. It's the way of the world - a sufficient opinion will result in laws, rules, etc. We more desire that kids get educated than we desire that they have the choice of not going to school to an age.


Posted by: Doug at December 5, 2007 1:42 AM


Doug,

You're getting hung up on what society says versus what you say again.

Here's the point Hippie is trying to make.

You feel that a 14 year old girl is competent (not legally allowed, but competent) to end a pregnancy and possibly alter her life forever.

But you do not feel that she is competent to serve in the military. (Not legally allowed, but competent).

The question is, why is she competent (not legally allowed by society) to make the decision to end the life growing inside of her, but not competent (not legally allowed by society, but not "competent") to put her own life in danger by joining the military?

If society tomorrow decided that she was not competent to decide to end her pregnancy, and made it illegal, would you be okay with that?

What if tomorrow, society said that it was fine if she wanted to join the miltary and fight in the front lines, but that it was not legal for her to get an abortion...and we were saying that she should be able to get the abortion because if she is competent to fight in the military, she should be competent to choose abortion. Would you say, well she isn't competent to choose abortion because society says so, and she is competent to serve in the military because society says so?

Nothing has changed. A 14 year olds maturity level is still a 14 year olds maturity level. So why is she competent in one area and not in the other?

Posted by: mk at December 5, 2007 6:11 AM


Doug,


Society gets to tell people what to do for no reason, just because society says so. No justification. No freedom of choice. No rights of the individual. Just because we say so.

I imagine you can figure out the justification on your own.

?????????????????????????????????????

What if what I imagine something different from what you imagine? Isn't that why we have laws and constitution? Clearly people do not agree on the justification.

I totally think you are dodging the question of justifying whether a person is allowed to make her own decisions. Simply telling me to go figure it out on my own doesn't clarify a reason that a person should be forced by society to spend years of her life in an occupation not of her choosing.

Nor does it clarify why birth control and abortion are the only medical decisions she can make for herself, much less a justification for it.

Society has no confidence in her decision making ability. That is why they want her to "choose" abortion. She might be a burden on the rest of us if she were a parent, partly because she can't legally function as an adult. If we say well she chose it then of course it is her fault. However we don't let her make other decisions because we don't feel it is in our interest to let her.

She is allowed to "choose" abortion because society wants her to choose it.

She is not allowed to quit school because society doesn't want her to choose it.

Society doesn't cares about her freedom or what she wants, they tell her what she can and can't do based on what they perceive as in their own interest and why? as you so aptly put it "Because society says so"

Why does society push her around and force her to do stuff, because they can. They feel what they want supercedes what she wants whenever they feel like it and there isn't a dang thing she can do about it.

When she wants a reason, just tell her to imagine a justification.

No freedom, no individual rights and no justification. Because society says so.

Without liberty or justice for all.

Posted by: hippie at December 5, 2007 8:02 AM


Doug,

From these comments, it doesn't appear you have the highest regard for the young woman:

"Doesn't mean I think she'd make a good soldier."

"It's because society does not see the greatest good being served by allowing her to skip school."

"That's saying nothing about the rather sticky problem of parents, guardians, the dreaded vice-principal, etc."

"That doesn't mean we have to let her into the tank corps or the astronauts' guild."

"Nobody is saying she would necessarily be a competent driver. In fact, society doesn't want her driving before a given age, and the same for drinking, opting out of school, being a police officer, or a pan-galactic straw boss, for that matter."

This is the same old attitude about how young women aren't competent to do anything except have sex. An abortion just enables her "choice" to have sex. She isn't competent to do any job, not even parent but we sure have confidence in her choice to have sex. How convenient. We don't accept her authority to make any other important decisions, but she is mature enough to make the decision to end the life of another human being. As you say that is how society works.

Posted by: hippie at December 5, 2007 9:57 AM



"It's because society does not see the greatest good being served by allowing her to skip school."

Does society see the greatest good being served by allowing her to choose to kill her baby?

Posted by: Anonymous at December 5, 2007 10:01 AM


If she's too young to decide whether to have an abortion, then she's CERTAINLY too young to be a mother.

We should allow parents to force their daughters to have abortions, if that is the parents' preference.

Posted by: SoMG at December 5, 2007 11:59 AM


If she's too young to decide whether to have an abortion, then she's CERTAINLY too young to be a mother.

In the years of pro-life/pro-abortion debate you've been involved in, you somehow have managed not to have heard of adoption?

Or abstinence?

Posted by: Bethany at December 5, 2007 12:45 PM


If she's too young to decide whether to have an abortion, then she's CERTAINLY too young to be a mother.

We should allow parents to force their daughters to have abortions, if that is the parents' preference.

Posted by: SoMG at December 5, 2007 11:59 AM

Is Somg prochoice or proabortion?

Posted by: hippie at December 5, 2007 2:21 PM


My point remains that those who favor legal abortions don't really care what she wants for herself, they hope there is someway, anyway she will abort because they don't want her to have her baby. She isn't good enough for them and neither is her baby.

Posted by: hippie at December 5, 2007 2:28 PM


My point remains that those who favor legal abortions don't really care what she wants for herself, they hope there is someway, anyway she will abort because they don't want her to have her baby. She isn't good enough for them and neither is her baby.

Posted by: hippie at December 5, 2007 2:28 PM
.................................................

That's ridiculous and unsupportable.

Posted by: Sally at December 5, 2007 7:02 PM


MK: You're getting hung up on what society says versus what you say again.

Ha! MK, even though I knew you were fast asleep, I could "feel" you reading and thinking. I guess I'd just say that society really does make some rules.... Hippie was asking "why?" rather than what I'd do.
......

Here's the point Hippie is trying to make.

You feel that a 14 year old girl is competent (not legally allowed, but competent) to end a pregnancy and possibly alter her life forever.

But you do not feel that she is competent to serve in the military. (Not legally allowed, but competent).

Oy Vey, I stayed up until like 3:30 a.m. today with this - there is a difference between desire and ability. Heck no - she's not "competent" to end a pregnancy. That is a physical, medical procedure. Good grief.... But she darn well knows whether she wants to remain pregnant or not.
......

The question is, why is she competent (not legally allowed by society) to make the decision to end the life growing inside of her, but not competent (not legally allowed by society, but not "competent") to put her own life in danger by joining the military?

Ye Olde Apples and Orange - She may well want to join the military or nor, just as she may well want to end or continue a pregnancy. When it comes to actually doing either, it's a lot different. Does the military want her? No. There, it's at least a two-way street. With her being pregnant, it's not that she has to be "competent" to end the pregnancy, since a doctor would do that. While, with the military, it certainly is a matter of her competency. It's a matter of her performing, rather than merely wanting.
......

If society tomorrow decided that she was not competent to decide to end her pregnancy, and made it illegal, would you be okay with that?

Nope. Does the military need 12 year old girls? I say no. Does society need to allow 12 year olds to be citizen soldiers? I say no. Does society need to forbid her to have an unwanted pregnancy? I say no there too.
......

What if tomorrow, society said that it was fine if she wanted to join the miltary and fight in the front lines, but that it was not legal for her to get an abortion...and we were saying that she should be able to get the abortion because if she is competent to fight in the military, she should be competent to choose abortion. Would you say, well she isn't competent to choose abortion because society says so, and she is competent to serve in the military because society says so?

Again, there is the difference between wanting and doing. No, I wouldn't say she isn't competent to choose abortion. As things are now, she may want to join the Army or not, or to continue a pregnancy or not - no need for hypotheticals. Were she allowed in the military, then yeah - I think she should be allowed to have abortions, but I think that anyway. I think there is a principle that's valid there, though, like 18 year olds can fight for their country, but can't buy a dang beer?
......

Nothing has changed. A 14 year olds maturity level is still a 14 year olds maturity level. So why is she competent in one area and not in the other?

Desire/Ability. Two different things.

Posted by: Doug at December 5, 2007 10:25 PM


Hippie: What if what I imagine something different from what you imagine? Isn't that why we have laws and constitution? Clearly people do not agree on the justification.

If you think a 12 year old girl would make a good soldier, let's hear why.
......

I totally think you are dodging the question of justifying whether a person is allowed to make her own decisions. Simply telling me to go figure it out on my own doesn't clarify a reason that a person should be forced by society to spend years of her life in an occupation not of her choosing.

I didn't mean to be dismissive, but good grief - is there any real doubt why the military doesn't want 12 year olds? It is a question of the organization valuing the girl. If she wants to drive a dang tank, she can go for it later on.
......

Nor does it clarify why birth control and abortion are the only medical decisions she can make for herself, much less a justification for it.

Yet again, most of her decisions aren't restricted. She can cut her fingernails, etc. It comes down to society (that which is making the rules) weighing her desires, her parents' desires, and those of society. What are the ramifications for a girl not to get a tattoo without her parents' permission? A far cry from not being allowed to end a pregnancy, or being forced to abort a wanted one.
.......

Society has no confidence in her decision making ability. That is why they want her to "choose" abortion. She might be a burden on the rest of us if she were a parent, partly because she can't legally function as an adult. If we say well she chose it then of course it is her fault. However we don't let her make other decisions because we don't feel it is in our interest to let her.

I think you're well out in left field there.
......

She is allowed to "choose" abortion because society wants her to choose it.

Without arguing that, I'd say or because society has no need to forbid her ending a pregnancy.
......

She is not allowed to quit school because society doesn't want her to choose it.

Yep.
......

Society doesn't cares about her freedom or what she wants, they tell her what she can and can't do based on what they perceive as in their own interest and why? as you so aptly put it "Because society says so"

In most areas she is free, yet of course society imposes some restrictions. Bottom line, a society is a group of people with things in common, and if an individual goes far enough outside of it, they will get put out of society, i.e. executed or imprisoned in our case.
.......

Why does society push her around and force her to do stuff, because they can. They feel what they want supercedes what she wants whenever they feel like it and there isn't a dang thing she can do about it.

Right - there are some areas where her parents, society, teachers, etc., will have control over her. It is human nature that it's going to be that way.
......

When she wants a reason, just tell her to imagine a justification. No freedom, no individual rights and no justification. Because society says so. Without liberty or justice for all.

Oh come on, if she can't shoulder the anti-tank missile......

Posted by: Doug at December 5, 2007 10:47 PM


"It's because society does not see the greatest good being served by allowing her to skip school."

Does society see the greatest good being served by allowing her to choose to kill her baby?

If you want to phrase it like that, then yes. Society has no need to force her to remain pregnant, certainly none that outweighs her desire to end an unwanted pregnancy.

Posted by: Doug at December 5, 2007 10:51 PM


Hippie: From these comments, it doesn't appear you have the highest regard for the young woman:

"Doesn't mean I think she'd make a good soldier."

Baloney, Hippie - I don't think 12 year old boys would make good soldiers either.
......

"It's because society does not see the greatest good being served by allowing her to skip school."

"That's saying nothing about the rather sticky problem of parents, guardians, the dreaded vice-principal, etc."

"That doesn't mean we have to let her into the tank corps or the astronauts' guild."

"Nobody is saying she would necessarily be a competent driver. In fact, society doesn't want her driving before a given age, and the same for drinking, opting out of school, being a police officer, or a pan-galactic straw boss, for that matter."

This is the same old attitude about how young women aren't competent to do anything except have sex.

Nope, just statements of fact.
......

An abortion just enables her "choice" to have sex.

No, she can have sex regardless of abortion. Not saying it's "good" but it does happen - it's human nature - and then the legality or not of aborton remains. The point with abortion is that unwanted pregnancies are a fact, and in some situations abortion is then the best way to go.
......

She isn't competent to do any job, not even parent but we sure have confidence in her choice to have sex. How convenient. We don't accept her authority to make any other important decisions, but she is mature enough to make the decision to end the life of another human being. As you say that is how society works.

No, I think almost all of us don't want her having sex. That's before any discussion of abortion or not. And no, she's almost surely (IMO) not competent to be a good parent, not at 12 years old. There are miscarriages and abortions all the time in society. I know you don't like abortion, but I don't see that dislike as outweighing a given girl or woman's desire to end a pregnancy.

Doug

Posted by: Doug at December 5, 2007 11:03 PM


Doug,

With her being pregnant, it's not that she has to be "competent" to end the pregnancy, since a doctor would do that. While, with the military, it certainly is a matter of her competency.

Obviously I'm not asking if she is competent to PERFORM an abortion. I'm asking if she is competent to make the DECISION to have one.

If she is competent to MAKE THE DECISION to end a life, then why isn't she competent to "MAKE THE DECISION" to quit school at age 11, take an aspirin in school at age 11, get a tattoo at age 11, pose for playboy at age 11, live on the street at age 11 or any multitude of other things? WHY?!?!?!?

We both know the answer, but I want to hear you say it.

Posted by: mk at December 6, 2007 6:22 AM


Obviously I'm not asking if she is competent to PERFORM an abortion. I'm asking if she is competent to make the DECISION to have one.

Okay, MK, but when we were talking about the military then her ability was in question, a much more real sense of "competent" or not. This all comes down to the girl wanting things. Some will be allowed and some will not.
......

If she is competent to MAKE THE DECISION to end a life, then why isn't she competent to "MAKE THE DECISION" to quit school at age 11, take an aspirin in school at age 11, get a tattoo at age 11, pose for playboy at age 11, live on the street at age 11 or any multitude of other things? WHY?!?!?!?

Because those who are determining "competency," there, have their own desires, which may be in opposition to the desires of the girl.

Society, parents, other authorities, etc., are saying "you've gotta go to school until such-and-such an age," etc. We want kids in school, that's pretty much it. It's pretty well unanimous. We are saying, "We want you in school, to a point, regardless of what you want."

Doug

Posted by: Doug at December 6, 2007 7:18 AM


Doug,

So you are saying that we do not feel that an 11 year old is capable of making that DECISION for herself? We feel that what we want is better for her?

Why? Why is what we want more important? And MORE IMPORTANTLY, what happens when WE no longer WANT her to have abortions? What will YOU say then?

Posted by: mk at December 6, 2007 8:47 AM


Not so fast...I'm asking YOU-DOUG to give me YOUR reasoning...so don't even try pulling the "Cuz society says so" thing on me. Why do YOU-DOUG think that this is a good policy?

Posted by: mk at December 6, 2007 8:48 AM


Oh Doug you are ever so frustrating sometimes.... What irks me is that you KNOW what she means and yet you avoid answering directly on purpose.

Posted by: Bethany at December 6, 2007 9:18 AM


Bethany, no, I don't know what she means. It is not really a matter of being "competent" to make a decision. The girl has desires, period. The question is if the authorities let her pick a given way in a given situation, and of course the answer is sometimes yes, sometimes no. What do you think? If anything I'd say that the individual could be said to be "competent" to decide as long as the authorities don't care too much that things go one way or another.

MK, yes indeed - we feel that what we want is better for her, in the matter of education (for example), no matter what she thinks. I realize you could say that you want what is best for her, in that you think not having an abortion is best - that's where you and I would disagree, at least at times.

What we want is more important because we say it is, just as I was telling Hippie. It's our valuation, society's etc. Still the same old bottom-line deal of desire at work. If we didn't care, or didn't care much, then we wouldn't mandate a thing.

If society would make abortion illegal, then I would say that is wrong. Society has no need to force either abortions or pregnancy continuance.


Posted by: Doug at December 6, 2007 12:02 PM


Doug,

If society would make abortion illegal, then I would say that is wrong. Society has no need to force either abortions or pregnancy continuance.

Okay, so in that instance you would be AGAINST what society wants, and in the minority? Am I correct?


Posted by: mk at December 6, 2007 2:48 PM


Oh Doug you are ever so frustrating sometimes.... What irks me is that you KNOW what she means and yet you avoid answering directly on purpose.

Posted by: Bethany at December 6, 2007 9:18 AM******************* Bethany, this equally frustrates me!

Posted by: heather at December 7, 2007 7:43 AM


"If society would make abortion illegal, then I would say that is wrong. Society has no need to force either abortions or pregnancy continuance."

MK: Okay, so in that instance you would be AGAINST what society wants, and in the minority? Am I correct?

You betcha.

Posted by: Doug at December 8, 2007 6:55 PM


Bethany, this equally frustrates me!

Oh come on, you two. If I believed exactly as you do, and said the same things, we wouldn't have the discussions we do.

Posted by: Doug at December 8, 2007 7:00 PM