Senate set to pass minors abortion bill

MCG

hippiemom wrote:

No, that's not the same as walking away. She has to pay for it, she has to go to the appointment, she has to attend the counseling sessions, she has to have the surgery itself with whatever pain, complications, etc. might be involved. The man doesn't have to do any of those things ... in fact, except for paying, he couldn't do any of them for her if he wanted to.

It's still walking away from an unwanted pregnancy regardless of all the stuff you have to do afterwards.

surferdude

hippiemom wrote:

No, that's not the same as walking away. She has to pay for it, she has to go to the appointment, she has to attend the counseling sessions, she has to have the surgery itself with whatever pain, complications, etc. might be involved. The man doesn't have to do any of those things ... in fact, except for paying, he couldn't do any of them for her if he wanted to.

An abortion in no way should ever be called surgery. The defiition of surgery is: 1. The branch of medicine that deals with the diagnosis and treatment of injury, deformity, and disease by manual and instrumental means. Being pregant is not an injury, deformity or disease. An abortion is almost always an elective medical procedure. Calling it surgery is mis-stating the truth and a dis-service to surgeons.

angelica

surferdude wrote:

Usually you are so good but this is so sexist. Guys have the exact same interest, except personal health issues, as the woman. No woman bares the burden of abortion themselves. The man faces nearly the same burdens but with zero authority to take actions.

Really? A person who ends a life that is not their own life to end is responsible for just that. The only person who owns such an action is the woman who takes the action.

There are distinct differences between aborting an unborn life inside of you and between encouraging or to otherwise cause another to abort an unborn life inside of them. I point to this very distinct difference in accountability.

This is further complicated by the fact that women's brains operate for the most part differently than men. Women tend towards being more wired in a caretaker/nurturer sense. Women lean towards relying predominantly on intuitive and emotional intelligences compared to men who lean towards being more "objective". For a woman to feel she has no choice but to go against her own instinct to care for those dependant upon her is a big deal in my mind. A very big deal.

Maybe it's actually sexist to minimise the huge differences that exist in such a situation, in order to expect "fairness" between the sexes. The fact is, the man does not go through even remotely the same situation. This does not minimise his OWN very pertinent experiences in the situation. They are very different and I don't accept the woman's own experience being umbrella'd in with the experience of another.

farfromglorified

angelica wrote:

Maybe it's actually sexist to minimise the huge differences that exist in such a situation, in order to expect "fairness" between the sexes. The fact is, the man does not go through even remotely the same situation. This does not minimise his OWN very pertinent experiences in the situation. They are very different and I don't accept the woman's own experience being umbrella'd in with the experience of another.

Very, very, very well done.

“Equality is not in regarding different things similarly, equality is in regarding different things differently.” -Tom Robbins

hippiemom

MCG wrote:

It's still walking away from an unwanted pregnancy regardless of all the stuff you have to do afterwards.

No ... a woman is forced to deal with it, one way or another. She doesn't have the option of simply acting as though it's not happening.

surferdude

angelica wrote:

Really? A person who ends a life that is not their own life to end is responsible for just that. The only person who owns such an action is the woman who takes the action.

There are distinct differences between aborting an unborn life inside of you and between encouraging or to otherwise cause another to abort an unborn life inside of them. I point to this very distinct difference in accountability.

This is further complicated by the fact that women's brains operate for the most part differently than men. Women tend towards being more wired in a caretaker/nurturer sense. Women lean towards relying predominantly on intuitive and emotional intelligences compared to men who lean towards being more "objective". For a woman to feel she has no choice but to go against her own instinct to care for those dependant upon her is a big deal in my mind. A very big deal.

Maybe it's actually sexist to minimise the huge differences that exist in such a situation, in order to expect "fairness" between the sexes. The fact is, the man does not go through even remotely the same situation. This does not minimise his OWN very pertinent experiences in the situation. They are very different and I don't accept the woman's own experience being umbrella'd in with the experience of another.

Some very good points about recognizing some general differences between men and women. But in the end no person faces burbens alone unless this is the path they've chosen for themselves.

surferdude

hippiemom wrote:

No ... a woman is forced to deal with it, one way or another. She doesn't have the option of simply acting as though it's not happening.

Neither does a man. We have a thing called a conscience.

MCG

hippiemom wrote:

No ... a woman is forced to deal with it, one way or another. She doesn't have the option of simply acting as though it's not happening.

Yes, she is forced to deal with it, I don't understand how that changes the fact abortion is still a way walking away from an unwanted pregnancy.

surferdude wrote:

Neither does a man. We have a thing called a conscience.

Beat me to it.

chopitdown

farfromglorified wrote:

You really have to wonder about a person who would take a child to another state to get a medical procedure without consulting that child's parents.......but this law is inappropriate and wrong.

i had the same initial thought...but a strikingly different conclusion.

hippiemom

surferdude wrote:

Neither does a man. We have a thing called a conscience.

YOU have one. Not all men do. Not all women do either, but a woman without a conscience has to deal with a pregnancy whether or not she feels like it ... a man does not.

angelica

farfromglorified wrote:

Very, very, very well done.

Thank-you. You are almost too kind this week.

“Equality is not in regarding different things similarly, equality is in regarding different things differently.” -Tom Robbins

I love this. Is he the author?

MCG

hippiemom wrote:

YOU have one. Not all men do. Not all women do either, but a woman without a conscience has to deal with a pregnancy whether or not she feels like it ... a man does not.

I don't think abortion is dealing with the pregnancy though, abortion is a way of avoiding dealing with the pregnancy.

farfromglorified

chopitdown wrote:

i had the same initial thought...but a strikingly different conclusion.

My conclusion comes from the fact that I also have to wonder about a person who passes a blanket law that disregards the will of two mature parties. It comes from the fact that I think a minor has a fundamental right to get an abortion without their parent's knowledge. And that anyone else has a fundamental right to assist in it. Ethically, it's certainly questionable to take a 16 year old across state lines to have an abortion without informing that 16 year old's parents. But just because something is ethically questionable does not mean it's something that should be considered an illegal action, particularly considering that it does not necessarily harm either party and is completely reflective of their individual wills.

farfromglorified

angelica wrote:

Thank-you. You are almost too kind this week.

You are almost too logical this week

I love this. Is he the author?

Tom Robbins is an author...one of my favorites. "Still life with Woodpecker" should be required reading in high school.

angelica

surferdude wrote:

Some very good points about recognizing some general differences between men and women. But in the end no person faces burbens alone unless this is the path they've chosen for themselves.

Thank-you.

In reality we all face our burdens alone. Having support or comfort on our journey in no way negates the fact that in the end, for our every action, we have to face the consequences and our inner demons all by ourselves. No one else can do one iota of it for us.

For those who feel otherwise, I'm willing to guess they have not faced such burdens yet.

chopitdown

farfromglorified wrote:

My conclusion comes from the fact that I also have to wonder about a person who passes a blanket law that disregards the will of two mature parties. It comes from the fact that I think a minor has a fundamental right to get an abortion without their parent's knowledge. And that anyone else has a fundamental right to assist in it. Ethically, it's certainly questionable to take a 16 year old across state lines to have an abortion without informing that 16 year old's parents. But just because something is ethically questionable does not mean it's something that should be considered an illegal action, particularly considering that it does not necessarily harm either party and is completely reflective of their individual wills.

I guess we differ on the fundamental right to get an abortion. For me, regardless of my stance on abortion; I don't think any "medical procedure" should be carried out on a minor without parental consent. I realize that there prob are cases where minors would be abused if the parents found out they were pregnant. So it's a tough call...do we pass a blanket law that may affect some negatively, or do we not pass a law and have parents lose their fundamental right to give consent for a minor to get a medical procedure. I know in research and medicine you can't do anything to a minor without assent and consent...to me, it is a great disservice to take away the consent of the parents...if i were a parent i would be livid that a physician would perform surgery (non-life threatening) on my child without my knowledge...more so than if i found out my daughter were pregnant.

angelica

farfromglorified wrote:

You are almost too logical this week

Sometimes I really adore you.

Tom Robbins is an author...one of my favorites. "Still life with Woodpecker" should be required reading in high school.

According to Wikipedia, he hails from North Carolina.

farfromglorified

chopitdown wrote:

I guess we differ on the fundamental right to get an abortion.

That's fair -- I completely understand why you'd come to the opposite conclusion given a view that says a fetus's life stands on higher grounds than the mother's will. Such a thing is logically defensible, even though I don't necessarily agree with it.

Legally this is strange though. The woman has a right to travel to another state without parental notification, but the accomplice does not. It's very odd. It's kind of like making bank robbery legal, but driving the getaway car illegal

For me, regardless of my stance on abortion; I don't think any "medical procedure" should be carried out on a minor without parental consent.

Ethically, yes. I completely agree. In the concept of legality, however, I will respect the individual's will over the wishes of the parent. If we ignore the dischord on the definition of life vis a vis abortion as you suggest above, the individual is not harming another person, nor is the accomplice.

If a 16 year old gets AIDS, I would understand if they did not wish to inform their parents. And I think that minor should have the right to seek out treatment on his/her own, if that is his/her will. Again, no one is harmed by that situation. The same goes for a minor travelling across state lines to receive an abortion.

I realize that there prob are cases where minors would be abused if the parents found out they were pregnant. So it's a tough call...do we pass a blanket law that may affect some negatively, or do we not pass a law and have parents lose their fundamental right to give consent for a minor to get a medical procedure.

Hehe...no. If any law is to be passed, it is a law against the child abuse. The fact that some minors will be abused within a chain of events is really irrelevant. You could pass a law against sex itself on the same logical ground.

Parents do not have a "fundamental right" to give consent for a minor to get a medical procedure. They have only a "fundamental right" to give consent for their own medical procedure. A child has a will separate from his/her parents'. A parent does not own the body of their child outside of the context of common ethics.

I know in research and medicine you can't do anything to a minor without assent and consent...to me, it is a great disservice to take away the consent of the parents...if i were a parent i would be livid that a physician would perform surgery (non-life threatening) on my child without my knowledge...more so than if i found out my daughter were pregnant.

This law is part of much legal inconsistency and hypocrisy. I'll definitely agree with that. And I can understand your anger at any physician who would do as you described -- I would share such anger. However, I would hope that you would recongnize the child's involvement in the process and the fact that such anger stems from an ethical judgment, rather than a purely logical judgment in the context of "fundamental rights".

farfromglorified

angelica wrote:

Sometimes I really adore you.

Only sometimes??? Even at my worst, I have my charms

According to Wikipedia, he hails from North Carolina.

Tom Robbins hails from the universe.

surferdude

angelica wrote:

Thank-you.

In reality we all face our burdens alone. Having support or comfort on our journey in no way negates the fact that in the end, for our every action, we have to face the consequences and our inner demons all by ourselves. No one else can do one iota of it for us.

For those who feel otherwise, I'm willing to guess they have not faced such burdens yet.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. For those who look I truly believe you can find peoples or places where you can share your burdens.