The other side's resolve for the completely unfettered right to kill babies knows no bounds. From the Chicago Sun-Times, November 4:
It has been 14 years and it will be at least a few more months before IL's long-mothballed parental notification law for teens seeking abortions takes effect....
A Cook County Judge Wednesday granted a temporary restraining order blocking enforcement of the law. That came after the state doctors' disciplinary board green-lighted the law over the objections of its own lawyer.
Attorneys for the ACLU, representing an abortion clinic, fought the law all the way through the federal court system and lost.
Now they argue that IL's constitution, which includes a right to privacy, grants even more abortion rights than the federal constitution, which has no explicit right to privacy.
An attorney for IL's abortion-rights-supporting attorney general, Lisa Madigan, who is charged with defending the law, said the writers of IL's 1970 constitution considered and rejected any laws recognizing or prohibiting a right to abortion. The state constitution is silent on the issue, Tom Ioppolo said.
But Judge Daniel Riley said he was persuaded enough by the ACLU's arguments that he put the law on hold to give them time to argue their case - probably at least a few months.
"I find that the arguments of the plaintiffs do in fact raise a fair question of constitutionality," Riley said. He agreed that the IL State Constitution's explicit guarantee of the right to privacy could mean a different outcome than decisions reached in federal courts around the country that have upheld parental notification laws in most states.
By the count of the anti-abortion side, 44 states, including all the other states in the Midwest, have parental notification laws that have been upheld as constitutional. In 36 of those states, the law is enforced.
But ACLU Attorney Lorie Chaiten [pictured above left] argued that even in states that have had the notification law for years, young girls can be "abused, kicked out of their homes and left homeless" by some less-than-understanding parents.
The next hearing is scheduled November 19.
[Top photo via dollbabytina]
"But ACLU Attorney Lorie Chaiten [pictured above left] argued that even in states that have had the notification law for years, young girls can be "abused, kicked out of their homes and left homeless" by some less-than-understanding parents."
Let me see if I understand the rationale behind missy Lorie's legal concerns.
If your unemancipated minor child for whom you are morally and leagally, some would argue 'spiritually' responsible, chooses to submit to an elective surgical procedure, that if it goes wrong, you will be financially responsible for the remedying the complications, then the custodial parent has no 'right' to at least be notified before the surgery.
Does ms. Loris have any minor children of her own. I wonder how she would feel if her son elected to have a vasectomy or be circumcised?
Of course her socially acceptable 2.3 children have been so well informed by her liberal worldview that they would never ever do anything that would conflict with what she believes is best for them.
And of course if she knows what is best for everyone elses children then she certainly knows what is best for hers.
I hope one of them comes home proudly displaying B.O. (um um um) logo tattooed on the center of his/her forehead.
yor bro kenPosted by: kbhvac at November 5, 2009 6:40 AM
I note that there are two MEN holding up this sign about abortion without apology.
No surprise there.
Men who want promiscuous sex without any responsibility for the children they father. So, the solution is to get rid of the child.
What great men these guys are - why can't women see them for what they are?
I wouldn't be caught even in their shadow.
Scumbags.Posted by: Ed at November 5, 2009 7:33 AM
Men have always been able to have promiscuous sex without any responsibility - that's how a patriarchy works; that's what the double standard is - now women can too, which is what makes many of you so angry.Posted by: Alana at November 5, 2009 8:13 AM
And Angel, what of the greater number of men on your side of the issue, intimidating patients and doctors, and telling women what to do with their sex lives and pregnancies. Project much?
We are in a golden age of providers. The Tillers make the news, but most providers are women. And women are leading the fight for women's reproductive rights.Posted by: Dhalgren at November 5, 2009 8:14 AM
How has promiscuous sex "empowered" you and given you success and the equality you seek?
Where's that guy who hates these laws because after you get parental consent you can "kill the baby?"
I always enjoyed those debates.
I don't think promiscuous sex has empowered women - nor did I say that. I just said that (with birth control and abortion), women are able to have it just like men have - with no consequences. Whether that's good or bad, well, that's up to the individual. I just think that's what's behind so much of this anti-choice, anti-contraception mentality - fear of women's sexuality and patriarchal values.Posted by: Alana at November 5, 2009 8:51 AM
"I just think that's what's behind so much of this anti-choice, anti-contraception mentality - fear of women's sexuality and patriarchal values."
Suppose the anti-choice movement really is motivated by the thought of oppressing woman's sexuality and promoting patriarchal values. How does it follow that abortion does not kill an innocent human being?Posted by: Bobby Bambino at November 5, 2009 9:00 AM
Perhaps this would just be easier if we all lived in a society where there was nothing ghastly about anyone taking care of another person? If men and women took care of one another? How evil and misogynistic could that possibly be? It would have to be better: things have to change. Perhaps this isn't the best change, but if we aim to improve this situation, Alana, where women cannot do anything in this world, then things have to change. We have had abortion all throughout human history. We've tried it as an illegal act and as a legal act- perhaps it's time we just got rid of it and allowed each other to live simply and love greatly.Posted by: Vannah at November 5, 2009 10:01 AM
So sorry to have to break it to you, Alana but abortion is hardly "consequence free."Posted by: carla at November 5, 2009 10:25 AM
Only for you Carla - I've read your story. But what one person regrets another doesn't - that's called individualism. Taking away someone else's choice because your choice was wrong for you isn't an answer.Posted by: Alana at November 5, 2009 10:30 AM
No. Not only for me. There are thousands of women and men like me that regret their abortions.
Toodles.Posted by: carla at November 5, 2009 10:31 AM
Men can't regret having an abortion. Perhaps they can regret supporting a woman or even pushing a woman into one - but they can't regret having one. And again - maybe there are thousands of women who regret having an abortion. I'm sorry their choice didn't work out for them. But there are thousands that do NOT regret their abortion. Again, denying someone a choice because your choice was wrong for you isn't the answer.
From the Chicago Tribune today:
"We are an island of abortion in the United States," said Thomas Brejcha, president and chief counsel of the Thomas More Society, which opposes abortion."
......The state will not police the clinics. The regulation department would only get involved if someone files a complaint, said Susan Hofer, a spokeswoman.
Ms. Hofer, there is something really wrong when abortion clinics can operate without strict regulation. Nursing homes, hospitals, and other health facilities, public schools, etc., are policed regularly where it comes to health issues. If child sexual abuse is so rampant in the state of Illinois as to keep the parental notification law from being enforced, then what is being done to help these girls??? Pray tell.
Posted by: Janet
at November 5, 2009 10:42 AM
Angel, I agree with you about men who support abortion because of the lure of "consequence-free" sex. A man who is willing to wet his willy but takes off, yelling "just get an abortion and leave me alone" as soon as he makes a child - that is no man at all.
I think we lost something when we as a society stopped expecting men to help take care of the children they help make. There is something to the social stigma we used to have about "deadbeat dads" who got a woman pregnant and then abandoned his share of the responsibility. Abortion is just an extreme form of this sort of irresponsibility. It's a shame men are willing to pressure women into KILLING their child because they don't FEEL LIKE paying child support or just being there and being a real father.
And even if a baby is not conceived or no diseases are passed from one to another - there is no such thing as "consequence-free" sex.Posted by: army_wife at November 5, 2009 10:47 AM
"But ACLU Attorney Lorie Chaiten [pictured above left] argued that even in states that have had the notification law for years, young girls can be "abused, kicked out of their homes and left homeless" by some less-than-understanding parents."
What about the teen girl who overdoses on drugs and is sent to the hospital to have her stomach pumped? Should her parents be kept in the dark because of the chance that they might be"less-than-understanding"?? Let's have some common sense and give our parents the benefit of the doubt for once.
100% of parents are responsible for their children's physical and moral upbringing. 99% of parents are decent human beings, which means one-percent of children are growing up in less-than-ideal-homes. Let's ask the judges and lawyers who are against parental notification how they will react when their grown daughter comes home in fifteen years and says, "I had an abortion, Mom, but at the time I was too afraid to tell you I was pregnant." Will you say, "that's ok dear, there was no law at the time that said you had to tell me. I made sure of that" ?Posted by: Janet at November 5, 2009 11:01 AM
I'm sure you must be in favor of the enforcement of this law. As an ACLU supporter, would you please consider writing a letter to Ms. Chaiten?
Just because they don't regret it doesn't mean it's not WRONG, Alana, it just means they choose to ignore the conscience they have been endowed with as human beings. And just because someone TELLS you they don't regret something doesn't mean that deep down inside themselves they don't.Posted by: Pamela at November 5, 2009 11:52 AM
As far as I know, we as a society are STILL trying to get men to take responsibility for their actions after they have kids. Pro-choice women especially support this - at least the ones I know. Perhaps I don't know enough. But there's still a stigma against "deadbeat dads." If anything, I think things are better today than they were in the past. Perhaps I'm just an idealist - but that's why there are laws in place now and ways to track down dads who don't pay child support. It's not perfect, but perhaps, instead of rallying against women's right to choose, you should rally FOR better child support laws and ways to make men pay it.Posted by: Alana at November 5, 2009 12:21 PM
Alana: "But what one person regrets another doesn't - that's called individualism."
I'm sure that there are plenty of murderers that DO NOT REGRET that they murdered someone. Does is make it right?Posted by: segamon at November 5, 2009 12:23 PM
Should have been "Does it make it right?" Sorry. :)Posted by: segamon at November 5, 2009 12:24 PM
Men regret that they once coerced their girlfriends to abort their own flesh and blood. Men regret that they had no say in the life or death of their child. They regret lost fatherhood. Men regret not saying anything. Men regret paying for an abortion and then walking away.
If I told you that my divorce devastated me but your divorce worked out really well for you, how does it stand to reason that your experience is more or less valid than mine?
My abortion story is irrefutable. It was horrifying. Someone saying to me, "My abortion wasn't horrifying at all." hardly refutes my experience. And saying my abortion didn't "work out for me" minimizes the pain I experienced and the death of my child. Actually, if the child dies then I guess an abortion does work out doesn't it? Hmmmm.
I see you are ignoring my friend Bobby's comment which was awesome, BTW.Posted by: carla at November 5, 2009 12:26 PM
Janet - I'm not sure that 99% of parents are decent human beings...but going with that statement - why would decent parents need a law that forces their kids to talk to them? If they're decent parents, wouldn't their daughter ALREADY go to them for help and advice?
Pamela- perhaps their conscience tells them something different. What's wrong to you might be okay for someone else. That's part of living in a democracy. And true, perhaps they do regret it deep down; but I think it's better to stop attributing emotions to people who would know better than anyone what they're feeling. You wouldn't want someone to say that, well, you SAY you're pro-life, but really, DEEP DOWN, you're pro-choice because of x,y,z....People's feelings and regrets are known only to them and to the people with whom they confide. Attributing YOUR emotions to them because you just can't possibly believe that anyone doesn't feel the way you do isn't the way to go - it implies that people (in this case, women) aren't their own moral agents, don't know themselves, and can't figure things out on their own without someone like YOU their to tell them how to feel.Posted by: Alana at November 5, 2009 12:32 PM
Perhaps it would just be best if we could love everyone? Abortion isn't working; it hasn't worked, ever, and no amount of ignorance is going to make it work. What we have to do is get rid of it- legally and illegally. It's wrong. And no amount of pushing this into, "Oh, well, it's your opinion" changes that. Anyone can use that argument. Rapists can use that argument.
Simply put, humanity needs to breathe and feel loved and we can't do that with all of the things that we have now: abortion, misogyny, genocide, totalitarianism. We have to have equality. That's not your decision: that's our right.
It's hard and seems foolish sometimes to pursue a world without abortion or poverty or any numerous things that people like Robert Berger say we can't get rid of, but we have to try. It's not as simple, though I'm sorry that pro-choicers can't see this, as "Your body, your choice, no biggie."
This is a very big deal. But we can work together to stop it.Posted by: Vannah at November 5, 2009 12:40 PM
Alana, I believe slaveowners and Nazis thought what they were doing was "right" and I am sure history tells us it was "legal" to own another human being and to decide which human beings were "worth" living, sub-human and which ones deserved to die. John Newton the slave-trader "thought" he was "right" and trading slaves was "legal". He could have said, "If you don't want any slaves don't buy any but don't mess with my legal right to own them. No one has a right to tell me not to own slaves."
Since Roe vs. Wade it is now LEGAL and a woman's "right to choose" to "dialate a woman's cervix, dismember, mutilate and kill her unborn baby (which is a separate, unique human being), use powerful suction to vacuum out her uterus and then piece together the babies parts to make sure you've got it all". This is what you are saying a woman has a right to do. God help you and our nation for shedding innocent blood.Posted by: Prolifer L at November 5, 2009 12:45 PM
"Janet - I'm not sure that 99% of parents are decent human beings...but going with that statement - why would decent parents need a law that forces their kids to talk to them? If they're decent parents, wouldn't their daughter ALREADY go to them for help and advice?"
Because kids are kids. They don't always use common sense or have the maturity needed to make decisions, especially in stressful situations. Are you so sure your own daughter, if you have one, would come to you?
For the sake of argument, what if the percentage of decent parents is only 90 percent. Why should these parent's right to parent be taken away? Should we punish 90 percent for the poor parenting of 10 percent?
I'm all for getting rid of abortion - not because I think it's wrong, but because I think we, as a society, haven't done much to help women in circumstances that make them want an abortion.
If possible, I'd like to see healthcare available for all (which I'm not seeing a lot of support here because OMG I might have to pay more taxes and I don't care about those poor people who don't have healthcare, I do and they don't matter!) and universal daycares and early childhood education centers for working moms - a society that says that men who don't share EQUALLY in parenting aren't doing their jobs. A society that actually ACTS like children are gifts instead of just saying so.
The economy doesn't help- but then, Republicans are the party of the super-rich, don't want to pay taxes, don't help the poor or the disabled, and we can put some of the blame on a Republican government that got us into the war in Iraq, an economy that's only now started to recover. But hey, at least zygotes matter!
Posted by: Alana
at November 5, 2009 12:56 PM
As for Nazis and slaveowners thinking they were doing something right....
Nazis didn't want anyone to find out about the Holocaust...that suggests that perhaps they were hiding something they knew was wrong. I am not a Nazi, so I don't really know. Nor can you. However, what the Nazis did wrong was murder PEOPLE/PERSONS...you know, born citizens. They were rounded up and slaughtered.
Slaves also were born persons...in many cases, kidnapped from their homes, or bred for more slaves. Equating abortion with either slavery or Nazism/the Holocaust is an insult to those who had to live through or die by either. It's an exploitation of those who went through or who had ancestors/family that went through either to use as a political/moral gain.
Alana @ 12:56,
When has the government been able to run anything without cost overruns and inefficiencies? Opposition to currently proposed healthcare reform is not so much about taxes and more about it being a poorly written plan. It's throwing the baby ( good healthcare) out with the bath water. There are private groups and individuals across our great country that are helping the needy every day. Many as volunteers. Let's keep the government's role to a minimum.Posted by: Janet at November 5, 2009 1:15 PM
Unfortunately, each of us only has a limited amount of time and energy for social causes. If you don't mind my asking, which one is closest to your heart?
This seems to be the busiest thread, so I'll say this here:
My friend, the one with the complicated pregnancy, has given birth in Albuquerque. She's okay. I was worried about her, but I don't know about her baby (his name is Jaxon).
So, if you could just keep praying and/or sending good thoughts there way until I find out for sure how Jaxon is doing, would you? I hope that he's okay. He has a hole in his stomach and it's affecting his intestines.
Please and thank you and thank you so much for all of the support that everyone's already shown.Posted by: Vannah at November 5, 2009 1:33 PM
Oops, sorry: *their way*Posted by: Vannah at November 5, 2009 1:35 PM
My prayers are with your friend and baby Jaxon.
Praying, Vannah.Posted by: carla at November 5, 2009 1:44 PM
Ah, Alana -- the Kennedys, the Kerrys, etc, are superrich and the Clintons are very wealthy. So are the Wall Street types that Obama bailed out. I read that Al Gore is about to become the first "green" billionaire.
Why is it okay for Democrats to be wealthy but not Republicans?Posted by: Phillymiss at November 5, 2009 2:05 PM
Thanks guys. I'm sorry to be such a killjoy, but I hope that everything goes okay. :(Posted by: Vannah at November 5, 2009 2:05 PM
"I am not a Nazi"
Are you sure? I'd bet you'd make a good Nazi.Posted by: Jasper at November 5, 2009 2:34 PM
Do you know who doesn't regret the fact that I didn't have an abortion?
My daughter. She was my daughter when she was inside me, and she is still my daughter. Slaves were the children of slaves before they were born as well. Pregnant Jews in concentration camps were still considered to be "with child", not "with non-sentient non-living human tissue".
And Phillymiss, let's not forget where Al Gore's money came from-a large portion of it was made from stock he bought in ethanol producing companies right BEFORE he cast the tie-breaking vote mandating ethanol be put in gasoline. Dishonest thieves.Posted by: xalisae at November 5, 2009 2:46 PM
Using scientific evidence, please explain to us how born persons are more human than unborn persons.
If you acknowledge that unborn persons are equally human to born persons, please explain why it is permissible to kill them.Posted by: Janette at November 5, 2009 2:54 PM
Love your comment about your daughter. Thank you for that!
Also to Alana
You said: "The economy doesn't help- but then, Republicans are the party of the super-rich,..."
Do you have a problem with all rich people, or do you only point out the pocketbooks of those you disagree with?
"...don't want to pay taxes,.."
Name one Republican who has campaigned on abolishing all taxes.
"...don't help the poor or the disabled,..."
You mean don't help the poor or the disabled through the policies and programs that you prefer, right? It's quite dishonest to assert that such a large segment of the population does nothing to help the poor or the disabled, when really what you are referring to is a disagreement on economic policy.
"But hey, at least zygotes matter!"
Your flippancy towards certain humans based on their size and level of development is bigotry, pure and simple. We receive our value through virtue of our humanity - any deviation from this is ideology tailored to suit the powerful. Are you comfortable with the "might makes right" notion that allows innocent human beings to be killed and discarded as medical waste?Posted by: Janette at November 5, 2009 3:07 PM
"Might makes right" is pretty much the theme of Alana's entire political philosophy. The might of the government to take away property and wealth of those who they feel are undeserving, the might of women to kill their children in the name of their "reproductive freedom"...on and on.Posted by: xalisae at November 5, 2009 5:03 PM
Hey Vannah so glad to hear your friend is doing ok. I will keep praying that her baby Jaxon is fine as well. Let us know when you find out something about him. They are able to do so many things to help babies with problems today, I pray he is in good hands and gets the best of care.
Alana don't insult the intelligence of the prolifers on this blog by saying that only people who have already been born have the right to be considered human beings "worth" living. Like Xalisae said her daughter did not become her daughter only after she was born or only because she "wanted" her. That mindset is schizophrenic and sick, we only call it a "baby" when I want a baby but it is a "fetus" when I don't want my baby, so I can kill him/her. Another human being's life and their inherent value, whether unborn, born, an infant, elderly, disabled, sick, or dying is never dependent upon whether someone else including their own mother "wants" them.
You need to hear Dr. Alveda King, Dr. Martin Luther King's niece, speak to the issue of why slavery is an excellent analogy for the justification of abortion and for the dehumanization of unborn babies. You can go to the priestsforlife.org website to see her writings. And you should see the maafa movie about the genocide of Black babies. I don't know the link for that website but I am sure there are others on this blog who can direct to to that website. website.Posted by: Prolifer L at November 5, 2009 5:18 PM
Those who murdered in the Holocaust and those who enslaved did not view their victims as persons, just like those who deny the "personhood" of the unborn.
You deny personhood and you can "justify" just about any atrocity.
Glad to hear your friend is doing well. Will continue to pray for her and Jaxson.
"And Phillymiss, let's not forget where Al Gore's money came from-a large portion of it was made from stock he bought in ethanol producing companies right BEFORE he cast the tie-breaking vote mandating ethanol be put in gasoline. Dishonest thieves"
wow, I didn't know that X about Al Hore.
dishonest theives is right.Posted by: Jasper at November 5, 2009 9:29 PM
Yes, Jasper, and they're finding now that ethanol in gasoline might actually make cars pollute more because it causes them to run less efficiently. Not to mention all the dead Haitians who riot in the streets/kill each other/die of starvation because we're diverting corn production that WAS going for relief efforts there into making ethanol to feed Al Gore's wallet. And Al wasn't the only Democrat who had stock in ethanol and voted on that bill. I have no respect for such disgusting wastes of space.Posted by: xalisae at November 6, 2009 10:44 AM
When businessmen & women act thusly, it's insider trading and they (some of them) go to prison. When politicians do it, it's what?Posted by: klynn73 at November 6, 2009 10:53 AM
Business as usual?
Good article. I'm glad the Tribune has seen the light. I thought the article from the Sun-Times was also very positive. I wrote an article myself about this issue at http://www.examiner.com/x-26603-Chicago-Christian-Perspectives-Examiner. I plan to call the governor on Monday!Posted by: Suzanne at November 6, 2009 11:44 PM