Nebraska court rules 16-year-old girl not mature enough for abortion

reply to post by SearchLightsInc

Funny, having an abortion is "avoiding taking responsibility" and yet abandoning the very saem child to the system is way more acceptable.

Agreed. And, women aren't cattle, to be forced to give birth to feed the adoption business with newborns to sell for profit!

reply to post by windword

Religious views aside, shes 16 years old, theres so many women that have taken care and are taking care of children. So yes she is old enough to raise a child, but getting an abortion is a more matured and extreme. I don't think that a 16 year old girl who just wants to have fun should be allowed to make a rational choice for her baby when her lifestyle is self destructive.

reply to post by DuecesxGeneral


So she's mature enough to be a child's guardian, but she's not mature enough to make her own decisions in regards to her body and her future, if her decision is abortion. If her decision is to be a mom, that's fine.

Hypocrite!

reply to post by windword

Very Hypocritical, how is she going to get what she needs for the child?
She is mature enough to have the child but not old enough to sign any paperwork regarding the child.
So, does she have any obligation to the hospital to pay her bills?

I mean the court has decided that she is operating in the capacity of a minor and isn't she, then, a minor being forced into a contract with a caregiver because they all said she had to have it? Will the foster parents be responsible for the medical bills of the baby? Will they still be responsible if the girl is placed in another home?

She can't even buy cough syrup from the local pharmacy.

This is very immature of the courts to allow this to happen.

reply to post by windword


You are right when it should be completely up to the mom, because its hers and no court has the right to oppose their views on someone as young as this, but i feel like aborting the baby isn't a way to make the problem disappear.
To be honest wither that child has a good or bad upcoming we don't know but that baby deserves the chance to strive.

reply to post by DuecesxGeneral


Why is that baby more deserving of life than any of the other's that are legally aborted every day? Why does this young women have to be the "one" to be forced to give birth to that "one" especially deserving baby?

DuecesxGeneral
reply to post by windword

 

You are right when it should be completely up to the mom, because its hers and no court has the right to oppose their views on someone as young as this, but i feel like aborting the baby isn't a way to make the problem disappear.

edit on 10-10-2013 by DuecesxGeneral because: (no reason given)

I am pretty sure that if she had been allowed to abort the pregnancy, the problem would actually disappear. Unless, of course, you mean the one where the courts still wield power over a woman's body, then, yes, sadly you are correct!

evc1shop

DuecesxGeneral
reply to post by windword

 

You are right when it should be completely up to the mom, because its hers and no court has the right to oppose their views on someone as young as this, but i feel like aborting the baby isn't a way to make the problem disappear.

edit on 10-10-2013 by DuecesxGeneral because: (no reason given)

I am pretty sure that if she had been allowed to abort the pregnancy, the problem would actually disappear. Unless, of course, you mean the one where the courts still wield power over a woman's body, then, yes, sadly you are correct!

If any person other than the women herself have any rights to make a decision should be the parent imo. She is still a minor and her parents should be the ones handling this not the supreme court like wtf. lol.

reply to post by windword


I think abortion should be illegal, because it might not be big difference now, but in a few years women's vagina will be considered tombs. The miracal of a woman's body is birth i mean it will be crazy if our so called sophisticated society continued to defy human nature just for selfish desires or future embarrassment.
Why is it that as a society we are always looking for the easy route out.
As a society we need to be teaching that a short cut can get you lost very easily.

reply to post by Grimpachi


Hey guess what here's an idea to her and all the females in existence. Give birth then give it up for adoption, atleast then the child will live and you can still go out and party and be a slut and whatnot. I doubt most of you people even know what it means to die and what it means to people to be lucky enough to be alive. People take everything for granted, especially LIFE I mean damn look at you, you guys kill your own babies.

windword
reply to post by SearchLightsInc

 

Funny, having an abortion is "avoiding taking responsibility" and yet abandoning the very saem child to the system is way more acceptable.

Agreed. And, women aren't cattle, to be forced to give birth to feed the adoption business with newborns to sell for profit!

You guys are seriously that illiterate? Doesn't matter what happens after the adoption, atleast the child will be alive.

DuecesxGeneral

evc1shop

DuecesxGeneral
reply to post by windword

 

You are right when it should be completely up to the mom, because its hers and no court has the right to oppose their views on someone as young as this, but i feel like aborting the baby isn't a way to make the problem disappear.

edit on 10-10-2013 by DuecesxGeneral because: (no reason given)

I am pretty sure that if she had been allowed to abort the pregnancy, the problem would actually disappear. Unless, of course, you mean the one where the courts still wield power over a woman's body, then, yes, sadly you are correct!

If any person other than the women herself have any rights to make a decision should be the parent imo. She is still a minor and her parents should be the ones handling this not the supreme court like wtf. lol.

From what I understand, her real parents have no contact with her due to their abusive behavior towards her. Her stand-in foster parents don't have the power to make the decision and so the issue ended up in the courts. The courts, apparently, had their hands tied somewhat as well since she is considered a ward of the court. They should have been able to find a way to escalate her status to that of a culpable and, yet, capable person who can make her decision and have it stick.
Perhaps if the schools who do most of the parenting these days were able to hold sex education classes and get the messages out about the pros and cons of birth control, abstinence and raging hormones to their pupils, this could have been avoided.

reply to post by Evanzsayz


As crude as that was I agree with you.
This is what selfish people do.

reply to post by DuecesxGeneral

I think abortion should be illegal, because it might not be big difference now, but in a few years women's vagina will be considered tombs.

LOL! You sound like this nutter!

They Are Coming for Your Birth Control: Radio Host Claims Your Womb is Full of Tiny Dead Baby Corpses

I've got news for you! Women's wombs are tombs, usually, once a month! It's where eggs go to die! LOL. More than half of all egg fertilizations end in spontaneous abortion! And if the woman is on the pill, even more "potential" babies go there to die! HORRORS! LOL!

The miracal of a woman's body is birth i mean it will be crazy if our so called sophisticated society continued to defy human nature just for selfish desires or future embarrassment.

Is that all women are for, making babies? Do you think women are selfish and too embarrassed of their sexuality to become mothers?

Why is it that as a society we are always looking for the easy route out.
As a society we need to be teaching that a short cut can get you lost very easily.

Do you think birth control is "the easy route"? Do you think that women who choose not to become mothers are lazy and unethical?

reply to post by Evanzsayz

 

Hey guess what here's an idea to her and all the females in existence. Give birth then give it up for adoption, atleast then the child will live and you can still go out and party and be a slut and whatnot.

And there it is! "Women who find themselves in the position of an unwanted pregnancy are sluts that just want to party! "

News flash! A fertilized egg is NOT a child! Forcing a woman to carry and give birth to an unwanted child, after you've had your fun, and made your donation, is slavery.

Maybe you'd be more comfortable living under Sharia Law than the US Constitution?

Evanzsayz
reply to post by Grimpachi

 

Hey guess what here's an idea to her and all the females in existence. Give birth then give it up for adoption, atleast then the child will live and you can still go out and party and be a slut and whatnot. I doubt most of you people even know what it means to die and what it means to people to be lucky enough to be alive. People take everything for granted, especially LIFE I mean damn look at you, you guys kill your own babies.

Why on earth would you want to promote this selfish behavior of having babies just to give them to others to take care of them.

Evanzsayz

windword
reply to post by SearchLightsInc

 

Funny, having an abortion is "avoiding taking responsibility" and yet abandoning the very saem child to the system is way more acceptable.

Agreed. And, women aren't cattle, to be forced to give birth to feed the adoption business with newborns to sell for profit!

You guys are seriously that illiterate? Doesn't matter what happens after the adoption, atleast the child will be alive.

I have seen some fine writing skills on this thread, and as for reading skills, I am sure none of the posters here are illiterate or they would not have been able to read, comprehend and form opinions of the previous posts on the current subject matter. Did you post this in the wrong thread?

Grimpachi

A 16-year-old Nebraskan girl who had to petition the Nebraska Supreme Court for her federally protected right to an abortion was denied when the judge ruled she was not mature enough to have an abortion. Oddly enough, they believe she is mature enough to be a mother.

According to Slate:

The teenager, identified in the court rulingas Anonymous 5, showed evidence of mature reasoning at a confidential hearing. She worried that she didn’t have the financial resources to support a child or to be “the right mom that I would like to be right now.” Yet district judge Peter C. Bataillon, whom the Raw Story reports once served on the committee for an Omaha anti-abortion group, disagreed, and the Supreme Court upheld his ruling in a split vote of 5-2.

Before the judge issued the ruling on October 4th, he asked the girl if she understood that an abortion would kill the baby inside her.

The girl, who had to go to the courts because of Nebraska's parental consent laws after her foster parents refused to allow her abortion because they held strong religious beliefs. In a secular country such as the United States, how are we allowing religious convictions of one person to influence the decisions of another?

Source

IMO this is an example where religion interferes with personal freedom. He says she is to young to make a decision on if she should be a mother. Guess that means he thinks she is mature enough to raise a child. That makes no sense at all. She has another option which is she can go to another state to have the abortion. She tried the legal avenue of her state but it looks like she got the wrong judge.

edit on 9-10-2013 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)

She wasn't old enough to have sex, either. There needs to be some consistency with law, if she isn't old enough to make sexual decisions for herself, she isn't old enough to make an abortion decision either.

Mature enough to raise a child at 16, but not mature enough make the choice she isn't mature enough to raise it.

Merricu.

FreeMason

Grimpachi

A 16-year-old Nebraskan girl who had to petition the Nebraska Supreme Court for her federally protected right to an abortion was denied when the judge ruled she was not mature enough to have an abortion. Oddly enough, they believe she is mature enough to be a mother.

According to Slate:

The teenager, identified in the court rulingas Anonymous 5, showed evidence of mature reasoning at a confidential hearing. She worried that she didn’t have the financial resources to support a child or to be “the right mom that I would like to be right now.” Yet district judge Peter C. Bataillon, whom the Raw Story reports once served on the committee for an Omaha anti-abortion group, disagreed, and the Supreme Court upheld his ruling in a split vote of 5-2.

Before the judge issued the ruling on October 4th, he asked the girl if she understood that an abortion would kill the baby inside her.

The girl, who had to go to the courts because of Nebraska's parental consent laws after her foster parents refused to allow her abortion because they held strong religious beliefs. In a secular country such as the United States, how are we allowing religious convictions of one person to influence the decisions of another?

Source

IMO this is an example where religion interferes with personal freedom. He says she is to young to make a decision on if she should be a mother. Guess that means he thinks she is mature enough to raise a child. That makes no sense at all. She has another option which is she can go to another state to have the abortion. She tried the legal avenue of her state but it looks like she got the wrong judge.

edit on 9-10-2013 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)

She wasn't old enough to have sex, either. There needs to be some consistency with law, if she isn't old enough to make sexual decisions for herself, she isn't old enough to make an abortion decision either.

edit on 11-10-2013 by FreeMason because: Less harsh toward the girl.

Then by default the prevailing logic should be that if she's not mature enough to make her own decisions she is then even less likely to be able to take reasonable responsibility for the life of an infant dependant on its mother for quite literally everything. Quite the paradox you've got there.

evc1shop

Evanzsayz

windword
reply to post by SearchLightsInc

 

Funny, having an abortion is "avoiding taking responsibility" and yet abandoning the very saem child to the system is way more acceptable.

Agreed. And, women aren't cattle, to be forced to give birth to feed the adoption business with newborns to sell for profit!

You guys are seriously that illiterate? Doesn't matter what happens after the adoption, atleast the child will be alive.

I have seen some fine writing skills on this thread, and as for reading skills, I am sure none of the posters here are illiterate or they would not have been able to read, comprehend and form opinions of the previous posts on the current subject matter. Did you post this in the wrong thread?

edit on 11-10-2013 by evc1shop because: clarity

Try to derail the thread all you want buddy. Just shows you have nothing to contribute other then little kiddy comments.