In case we haven't beaten the abortion horse to death yet

[finn]

That is in the end a poor presumption to make. It's not about the sex, it's about the life involved. I don't think it's anymore arcane than the belief that a human being needs to breathe air, drink water and eat food to live. By which I mean to say, a long held belief is not inherently a false belief, anymore than a new belief is inherently correct. I could just as easily suggest that the cavalier attitude some western cultures have towards abortion probably stems from their general tendency towards nihilism and not valuing human life so much as animal life...but such a generalisation isn't necessarily anymore accurate than your observation.

Sorry Tjol, but if you look at what I saying here you'll see that the reference to arcanity of some Amerian attitudes to sex is contextual to the reasons why I think the kids don't talk to their folks about it or may have guilt or fear of punishment if they do. That directly translates to them looking for anonymous and confidential services and advice. If their perception of their parents reaction were positive, then they would likely not need that anonimity.

Whilst I get your explainantion now of the parental accompanyment, in circumstances where fear or extreme embarrassment might exist, I still think that if there is a demand for black market services then thses services will become available.

[Cail]

I think both Finn and Avatar have it wrong. The American attitude that "the rules don't apply to me" and/or that there's a quick solution to a bad choice is what's driving this issue. People look for a quick, easy solution to everything, hence the reason that we're bombarded with drug advertisements on TV (want to lower your blood pressure lard-ass? Don't bother pushing yourself away from the table, take a pill!).

Our culture has successfully dehumanized fetuses to the point that an abortion-the termination of a child's life-has been reduced to a medical procedure that a child can have without telling their parents.

[finn]

I think there are number of things that drive issues such as this and I think that your rationale Cail is solid but doesn't have to be mutually exclusive of either my view or Av's on this. Indeed I think that what you describe as dehumanisation is one of many cases of a loss of gravity in modern relationships with parents, siblings, spouses and children; born or unborn (as you see it). The integrity and fidelity of the family unit as a whole has been undermined by the pill-popping quick fix brigade as much as driven by the rejection of the Puritan Christian zealots or the control/freedom evangelists.

Its all about rights and not about the responsibilities those rights entail. Its a young girls right to have sex without a condom and her right to get rid of the foetus, but the responsibility bit has been washed out of the mix. As you know Cail I have mixed views on this but I do not believe in abortion as something to be done in the same manner as popping a coke from a vending machine. Apart from the fact that abortion should always be seen as a tragedy and as a port of last, not first resort; even for the establishment pro lifers, there is the lasting psychological trauma that can remain a cost to be borne many years afterwards.

However the ideals we might like to still see do not change the here and now and as such I think my views as expressed stand, not proudly, not as a flag to follow but as a reasonable precaution against a potentially worse situation, ironically also a result of the decaying fabric of those same life values.

[Tjol]

That is in the end a poor presumption to make. It's not about the sex, it's about the life involved. I don't think it's anymore arcane than the belief that a human being needs to breathe air, drink water and eat food to live. By which I mean to say, a long held belief is not inherently a false belief, anymore than a new belief is inherently correct. I could just as easily suggest that the cavalier attitude some western cultures have towards abortion probably stems from their general tendency towards nihilism and not valuing human life so much as animal life...but such a generalisation isn't necessarily anymore accurate than your observation.

Sorry Tjol, but if you look at what I saying here you'll see that the reference to arcanity of some Amerian attitudes to sex is contextual to the reasons why I think the kids don't talk to their folks about it or may have guilt or fear of punishment if they do. That directly translates to them looking for anonymous and confidential services and advice. If their perception of their parents reaction were positive, then they would likely not need that anonimity.

Whilst I get your explainantion now of the parental accompanyment, in circumstances where fear or extreme embarrassment might exist, I still think that if there is a demand for black market services then thses services will become available.

So the 'arcane'ness of attitude involved with sexuality obfuscates the communication between parent and child? Then I misunderstood you.

Doesn't the involvement I suggest change that equation? Let's say you're right, and all the way up to 25% of underage women go to unsanctioned abortion clinics where the parents don't find out about it initially. Of those 25% how many suffer a complication from the abortion that parents are going to inevitably get involved with? And of the 75% of parents who do get involved, and talk to their daughter, and go through the process with their daughter, how many of them are still going to afford themselves the luxury of pretending that their daughter's sexuality will go away if they simply don't talk about it?

I'm allowing for a 25% failure rate in enforcement, which isn't likely, and even then, long term, the goal is accomplished, underage persons will be protected from exploitation thanks to their parent's involvement in the process when an underage person decides to go that route. The side benefit being more open conversation about the issue between parents and their children on the issue.

[duchess of malfi]

The farthest I personally will compromise on abortion is to keep it legal, but with the following conditions:

(a) no third trimester killings, as it certianly involves the infliction of pain, and it's utterly unnecessary that it should take any woman over 168 days to realise she wants an abortion.

(b) parents shall be notified prior to providing an abortion for an underage girl, shall be given an opportunity to speak with her prior to the procedure, and shall be present to observe that the abortionist does their work professionally.

If safety really requires that the parents and the daughter be on two sides of glass through a telephone, so be it. Likewise with their witnessing the procedure to make sure that the abortionist doesn't endanger their daughter's life.

A. in general, I completely agree with this, with two exceptions:
1. if the mother develops a life threatening condition, where she has to choose between her life and her baby's
2. if it is found out late in the pregnancy that the baby has some sort of defect that makes life outside the womb literally impossible (such as not having a brain) - in that case, the mother should not have to carry the baby the full nine months if she does not wish to.

Notice that neither of these exceptions is because a woman suddenly decides that she does not want her baby.

b. in an ideal world, this would be fine. However, having grown up in an abusive household and knowing firsthand how much terror an abused child can feel towards a parent, I think that a child should have an alternate authority figure to approach for permission in situations like this. I would suggest that judges should be empowered to help girls in some situations rather than a parent (particularly if there is sexual molestation going on within the family). It should be up to the parents OR a judge to help determine whether or not the abortion takes place, and the only part a school should have in it is referring a girl in trouble to the courts if there is a serious situation going on where she cannot approach her parents (such as alleged sexual abuse within her family).

Obviously, in such cases, the family should also be investigated for the alleged abuse and the girl protected from it if it does exist.

[Avatar]

The middle east has a higher occurance of abortion than the US...

I'm gonna have to see some figures for that. Abortion is illegal in the most, if not all, of the middle east as far as I know.

In western society it can at least be said that some abortions are had for quality of life. That can't be said in the middle east where honor killings tell you that sexual 'shame' is a bigger driving force than quality of life.

The value of life there is obviously less if honour killings are acceptable. Not to mention death sentences for relatively trivial things, etc.

--A

[Cybrweez]

exactly. parental consent for minors. parental notification for minors.
legally, a minor is below the age of 18. period. we've all decided that
and have been living this way for decades. we've all agreed to it.
so how can a 15 year old go get an abortion without parental consent?

Yea, you'd think it would be a no-brainer. Amazing people argue 'what's the problem?'

and cail, i don't get your thing about my body my choice and all drugs being legal. what did you mean? 'splain your analogy please. (sorry, it's probably obvious but i don't get you)

I think the point is that if you say my body my choice, you shouldn't have a problem w/legal drugs, b/c you're body.

But I like to ask if pro-choice, then you don't agree w/alimony right?

[finn]

Tjol,

I see your point, but sadly its often the case that these kids do not want to talk to their parents, I'm pretty sure I would not have! Some do tho', but this is about those who do not. The % is already set in terms of these kids' comfort in involving their parents its 100% they are the ones who do not/will not. Now there may well be a % who if parental consent/notification were required would benefit and come round and develop a relationship, but there will still be those who will not. They will be driven deeper underground and more prey to unprofessional and dangerous procedures and also prey to the lower end of the human spectrum that feed on others desperation.

The clinic at this school behaved properly within its terms of reference and a pregnant girl who felt she could not discuss this with her mother was treated properly and professionally and safely. She was provided with a "sanctioned" option that didn't include poor care and danger and having parentel accompanyment would have not changed anything.

[Cail]

exactly. parental consent for minors. parental notification for minors.
legally, a minor is below the age of 18. period. we've all decided that
and have been living this way for decades. we've all agreed to it.
so how can a 15 year old go get an abortion without parental consent?

Yea, you'd think it would be a no-brainer. Amazing people argue 'what's the problem?'

and cail, i don't get your thing about my body my choice and all drugs being legal. what did you mean? 'splain your analogy please. (sorry, it's probably obvious but i don't get you)

I think the point is that if you say my body my choice, you shouldn't have a problem w/legal drugs, b/c you're body.

But I like to ask if pro-choice, then you don't agree w/alimony right?

Yeah, that's it.


And a really good point about alimony too.

[Tjol]

The farthest I personally will compromise on abortion is to keep it legal, but with the following conditions:

(a) no third trimester killings, as it certianly involves the infliction of pain, and it's utterly unnecessary that it should take any woman over 168 days to realise she wants an abortion.

(b) parents shall be notified prior to providing an abortion for an underage girl, shall be given an opportunity to speak with her prior to the procedure, and shall be present to observe that the abortionist does their work professionally.

If safety really requires that the parents and the daughter be on two sides of glass through a telephone, so be it. Likewise with their witnessing the procedure to make sure that the abortionist doesn't endanger their daughter's life.

A. in general, I completely agree with this, with two exceptions:
1. if the mother develops a life threatening condition, where she has to choose between her life and her baby's
2. if it is found out late in the pregnancy that the baby has some sort of defect that makes life outside the womb literally impossible (such as not having a brain) - in that case, the mother should not have to carry the baby the full nine months if she does not wish to.

Notice that neither of these exceptions is because a woman suddenly decides that she does not want her baby.

b. in an ideal world, this would be fine. However, having grown up in an abusive household and knowing firsthand how much terror an abused child can feel towards a parent, I think that a child should have an alternate authority figure to approach for permission in situations like this. I would suggest that judges should be empowered to help girls in some situations rather than a parent (particularly if there is sexual molestation going on within the family). It should be up to the parents OR a judge to help determine whether or not the abortion takes place, and the only part a school should have in it is referring a girl in trouble to the courts if there is a serious situation going on where she cannot approach her parents (such as alleged sexual abuse within her family).

Obviously, in such cases, the family should also be investigated for the alleged abuse and the girl protected from it if it does exist.

That would be consistant with the state making a child a ward of the state in general when an abusive situation is uncovered. It puts the girl in a tough position, she has to make the claim to the state... but it's a good thing to force such a thing to be said. One of the other problems with abortion as it's currently done, is that rapists and molesters get off the hook based on the over-privacy currently employed. False claims can be adressed after the fact... but in the end there's already a disincentive, if a girl claims abuse falsely, she is going to become a ward of the state regardless...

[Tjol]

Tjol,

I see your point, but sadly its often the case that these kids do not want to talk to their parents, I'm pretty sure I would not have! Some do tho', but this is about those who do not. The % is already set in terms of these kids' comfort in involving their parents its 100% they are the ones who do not/will not. Now there may well be a % who if parental consent/notification were required would benefit and come round and develop a relationship, but there will still be those who will not. They will be driven deeper underground and more prey to unprofessional and dangerous procedures and also prey to the lower end of the human spectrum that feed on others desperation.

The clinic at this school behaved properly within its terms of reference and a pregnant girl who felt she could not discuss this with her mother was treated properly and professionally and safely. She was provided with a "sanctioned" option that didn't include poor care and danger and having parentel accompanyment would have not changed anything.

My dad was pretty clear that sex could produce children. So I...go figure... stuck to activities that wouldn't produce an unwanted consequence. That being said, I don't think I'd have feared speaking with my parents if I had been part of conceiving a child.

I don't think the school behaved appropriately, as they did not inform the parents of what was going on. Had something gone wrong with the abortion, the parents wouldn't have known about it. Government does not 'know better' than parents when it comes to children, if the government thinks the parents aren't fit to parent, then why is the child the responsability of parents in the first place?

[Cagliostro]

My dad was pretty clear that sex could produce children. So I...go figure... stuck to activities that wouldn't produce an unwanted consequence. That being said, I don't think I'd have feared speaking with my parents if I had been part of conceiving a child.

I don't think the school behaved appropriately, as they did not inform the parents of what was going on. Had something gone wrong with the abortion, the parents wouldn't have known about it. Government does not 'know better' than parents when it comes to children, if the government thinks the parents aren't fit to parent, then why is the child the responsability of parents in the first place?

Amazingly good point at the end there. If it is a matter of abuse, then that should be looked into and dealt with. I understand people not wanting to take the consequences of their actions, and the potential of being kicked out of their home, which is definitely a real scenario in these cases, but to be perfectly honest, that is a consequence as well.
Alternately, though, I don't think we should get child services involved and take a kid away from their parent if the parent opts to not teach about birth control, and the kid gets pregnant due to no knowledge of birth control. Not that kids don't usually find out about such things elsewhere, but I grew up in a family like you did, Tjol - I knew what caused pregnancies, and how to prevent and be careful about it. Which is why although I've been sexually active since my Junior year of high school, yet didn't have a kid until 39 when I actively tried. Believe me - I had lots of doubts that I'd be able to conceive, but it happened pretty quickly.
Something I think some of you are missing in this equation is that the person having the abortion just simply goes out and does it without a thought. I've known a few people over my years that have had abortions (my step-mother included), and it isn't something the majority of people thoughtlessly do. In each case, it figuratively tore them apart to do it. I'm sure there are some people out there that do use abortion as birth control, but I think they are the exception, and I wouldn't be opposed to a limit (with exceptions) of number of times you can have an abortion, although how to enforce is another issue.
It's such a difficult topic. So much morality is involved in it, and really the best solution is for everyone to focus on not having need of abortions, but to have it there safely for those more extreme occasions (such as rape and sexual abuse (which essentially is the same thing) and such).

And Cail, I bring this up mainly to be an ass (though I think it's as valid as the drug/alimony question), but do you think abortions should be made illegal, and if so, how does that fit in with your Libertarian ideology?

[Avatar]

Good post Cag.

--A

[Rawedge Rim]

My dad was pretty clear that sex could produce children. So I...go figure... stuck to activities that wouldn't produce an unwanted consequence. That being said, I don't think I'd have feared speaking with my parents if I had been part of conceiving a child.

I don't think the school behaved appropriately, as they did not inform the parents of what was going on. Had something gone wrong with the abortion, the parents wouldn't have known about it. Government does not 'know better' than parents when it comes to children, if the government thinks the parents aren't fit to parent, then why is the child the responsability of parents in the first place?

Amazingly good point at the end there. If it is a matter of abuse, then that should be looked into and dealt with. I understand people not wanting to take the consequences of their actions, and the potential of being kicked out of their home, which is definitely a real scenario in these cases, but to be perfectly honest, that is a consequence as well.
Alternately, though, I don't think we should get child services involved and take a kid away from their parent if the parent opts to not teach about birth control, and the kid gets pregnant due to no knowledge of birth control. Not that kids don't usually find out about such things elsewhere, but I grew up in a family like you did, Tjol - I knew what caused pregnancies, and how to prevent and be careful about it. Which is why although I've been sexually active since my Junior year of high school, yet didn't have a kid until 39 when I actively tried. Believe me - I had lots of doubts that I'd be able to conceive, but it happened pretty quickly.
Something I think some of you are missing in this equation is that the person having the abortion just simply goes out and does it without a thought. I've known a few people over my years that have had abortions (my step-mother included), and it isn't something the majority of people thoughtlessly do. In each case, it figuratively tore them apart to do it. I'm sure there are some people out there that do use abortion as birth control, but I think they are the exception, and I wouldn't be opposed to a limit (with exceptions) of number of times you can have an abortion, although how to enforce is another issue.
It's such a difficult topic. So much morality is involved in it, and really the best solution is for everyone to focus on not having need of abortions, but to have it there safely for those more extreme occasions (such as rape and sexual abuse (which essentially is the same thing) and such).

And Cail, I bring this up mainly to be an ass (though I think it's as valid as the drug/alimony question), but do you think abortions should be made illegal, and if so, how does that fit in with your Libertarian ideology?

because you are permanently removing the liberty of the unbirthed child by having it aborted. the biological parent is deprived of liberty for approx. 9 monthes, while the aborted fetus is permanently deprived.

[Cail]

And Cail, I bring this up mainly to be an ass (though I think it's as valid as the drug/alimony question), but do you think abortions should be made illegal, and if so, how does that fit in with your Libertarian ideology?

Murder's illegal. As far as I'm concerned, abortion is murder. There's no conflict whatsoever with my Libertarianism.

If you want to shoot heroin, that's your business, and while it may bother your family, no one else dies as a result of it.

[Avatar]

Is the death penalty murder too?

--A

[Cail]

By strict definition, probably. But there's no comparison between capital punishment and abortion. A person sentenced to the death penalty chose the behavior that got them to that point.

[Orlion]

because you are permanently removing the liberty of the unbirthed child by having it aborted. the biological parent is deprived of liberty for approx. 9 monthes, while the aborted fetus is permanently deprived.

In order for the "unbirthed child" to have liberty, it needs to have some ability to control its fate... which it does not. One could argue that it may have rights (I won't), but it doesn't have liberty.

My whole take on this is whether or not a parent should be allowed to force their child to make a life changing choice, even if it is against that child's wishes. The government , at least, is only providing the option, a parent tends to be more coercive. The best any of them could have is good intentions, but the child is the one living its life and the one that has to live with its choices. If the girl doesn't want to have the life having a child would entail, I think a safe backdoor should be provided so that the child's will would not be suppressed by controlling parents. This isn't about government or parent knows best, but about the liberty of the child.

This also tells me that if and or when I have children, I should treat them in such a way that they'll feel comfortable to talk to me about anything, even if it's about an action I don't agree with.

[Holsety]

Don't really have a problem with her being able to get abortion without parent's consent. Do have a problem with the high school encouraging her to do this. One thing to advocate for minors having their own rights, another to then impose your own opinion/advice on them in place of the parent's.

"Makes me feel like my rights were completely stripped away."

I mean, I didn't think parents had a right to "weigh in on" or make decisions on the abortion, so I feel like she had a misconception to think they were there in the first place.

It would seem that we should bring swift justice on any center trying to conduct any kind of medical procedure on a person who is under the age of majority, without their parent's knowledge. I can concede that parental approval shouldn't be required, but their knowledge should be allowed, and they should be allowed to consult their children.

No expert on abortion law but isn't it legal to not disclose any information to the parent? Assuming I'm right, rather than "bring swift justice" it should be more like "swiftly legislate justice" if you really feel this way, retroactive legal action is not the way to go in this circumstance I think.

Abortion is probably the only issue left for me where either side can change my opinion if I listen to it.
Give me ten minutes with a right to chooser and I'm agreeing with them.
I can turn from that person, start up a conversation with a right to lifer and I'm 100% on that side.
It's unreal.

I don't know how exactly to explain it, but I think I may to some extent be anti-choice and anti-life. I don't particularly care about the extinguishing of life prior to birth. However, for myself I use protection because I think it's worth being circumspect for the sake of those that think abortion is equivalent to murder. The occurrence of pregnancy is pretty easy to limit the chances of, so...why not?

Ask a "my body my choice" person if they believe that all drugs should be legal. If they answer "no", then tell them to pack sand.

I've always felt like that particular phrase is more about woman making the choice regardless of others' opinions, rather than about people being able to do anything they want to their own bodies. In other words, the right to have an abortion being assumed, the pregnant woman becomes the only person who can make the choice.

This may be problematic too, and I know for a fact that YOU have addressed this issue yourself, but I don't think the reason you gave this time really contradicts with what they seem to believe.

It goes to show I think that concern about abortion in the US isn't about sex, it's about the perception of the preciousness of life and the regret for wasting it. You can't claim to place a high value on human life while at the same time having a cavlier regard for abortion.

Not entirely agreed. One "pro life" approach towards pregnant minors has been that the life of the fetus is so important that one should accept you've made a mistake and live with it (or give the child up for adoption). Whether this is the intention or no, I think this ultimately places sex (especially unprotected sex) as a mistake in the teenage years, even though there is a rather simple way to solve pregnancies (abortion).

But I'm arguing that this approach may be a way people try and de-sexualize the culture, not so much that a de-sexualized culture takes this approach, because I do not think that the US, or pro-lifers, are desexualized. It is true that the parent/child discussion on sex may frequently be muted but that does not mean sex is not discussed.

I think both Finn and Avatar have it wrong. The American attitude that "the rules don't apply to me" and/or that there's a quick solution to a bad choice is what's driving this issue. People look for a quick, easy solution to everything, hence the reason that we're bombarded with drug advertisements on TV (want to lower your blood pressure lard-ass? Don't bother pushing yourself away from the table, take a pill!).

Our culture has successfully dehumanized fetuses to the point that an abortion-the termination of a child's life-has been reduced to a medical procedure that a child can have without telling their parents.

Hmm, I think the issue with the "quick, easy" solutions to any sort of undesirable physical attribute is that they don't usually work. If they do sufficiently perfect diet pills someday in the far future, would it be a bad idea to use them? However, abortion is a rather quick solution to pregnancy compared to actually carrying the child to term compared to, say, liposuction. I'm not saying there aren't even better solutions, (condom, abstinence) but given that the ones that most solutions that allow for sex aren't perfect, abortion is a pretty good option if those fail, assuming the dehumanization of the fetus is complete (i.e. if the woman feels guilt over having the abortion, maybe it wasn't so successful after all).

The last part leads into a discussion that leads into questions like "should we weigh the abortion of the fetus more or less highly than we do already?" which I think you, Cail, have already said can't be answered to everyone's satisfaction (and perhaps right now are answered to no one's satisfaction, probably the best we can hope for ).

[Avatar]

By strict definition, probably. But there's no comparison between capital punishment and abortion. A person sentenced to the death penalty chose the behavior that got them to that point.

But under some circumstances therefore, murder is acceptable. So what it really is is a matter of defining those circumstances.

--A