She's a child. More importantly, she's a child with no support system. WE'RE the one's who are going to end up paying for that baby.there’s a middle ground between pro-abortion and just all out stupidity. She is being faced with consequence for sex without protection.
So she should just be able to kill it.She's a child. More importantly, she's a child with no support system. WE'RE the one's who are going to end up paying for that baby.
She should be able to, but the state is forcing her to keep a baby that she doesn't want & isn't mature enough to raise.So she should just be able to kill it.
There’s a huge lack of accountability in the USA nowadays. Now I don’t agree with the right wing abortion nut jobs not the problem here is not that she can’t have an abortikn, the problem is she is 16 and having unprotected sex. The problem is that she got herself pregnant…she wants to make the problem disappear with abortion.She should be able to, but the state is forcing her to keep a baby that she doesn't want & isn't mature enough to raise.
Come down off your soapbox for a minute, big dog. It's easy to shake your finger at the teen, but we don't know how she got pregnant. That girl is a ward of the state herself, and sexual abuse is a huge problem in the foster care system. How do you know that she wasn't raped or sexually assaulted? Casting judgement on that girl doesn't fix the real issue which is that females in certain states are legally prevented from receiving abortions.There’s a huge lack of accountability in the USA nowadays. Now I don’t agree with the right wing abortion nut jobs not the problem here is not that she can’t have an abortikn, the problem is she is 16 and having unprotected sex. The problem is that she got herself pregnant…she wants to make the problem disappear with abortion.
Making it about anything other than the mistake she made is trying to appeal to emotion. I’ve been a master at not getting a woman pregnant and it’s been by not busting hot ones in them. Do I think abortion should be an option? Yes. But that’s not the issue. The issue is irresponsibility regarding sex.
You had to make up a hypothetical stew to justify her actions. What we do know is she was out here having sex and is now dealing with the consequence of said action. Why should she have the right to kill the baby when she created it? If she was raped that’s one thing but if she willfully engaged this is cause and effect at play.Come down off your soapbox for a minute, big dog. It's easy to shake your finger at the teen, but we don't know how she got pregnant. That girl is a ward of the state herself, and sexual abuse is a huge problem in the foster care system. How do you know that she wasn't raped or sexually assaulted? Casting judgement on that girl doesn't fix the real issue which is that females in certain states are legally prevented from receiving abortions.
Yes, the girl had sex. What we don't know is whether or not it was consensual. You're the one who made up the hypothetical stew (whatever that is). Again, get off of your soapbox. The issue isn't why that girl became pregnant, the issue is that a child is being forced by her state's govermment to carry a baby to term. If you can't grasp that, and only want to wag your finger at a child for getting pregnant, then don't bother responding to me. Your inflated sense of moral superiority has nothing to do with the issue at hand.You had to make up a hypothetical stew to justify her actions. What we do know is she was out here having sex and is now dealing with the consequence of said action. Why should she have the right to kill the baby when she created it? If she was raped that’s one thing but if she willfully engaged this is cause and effect at play.
I’m not pretending to be superior at all.Yes, the girl had sex. What we don't know is whether or not it was consensual. You're the one who made up the hypothetical stew (whatever that is). Again, get off of your soapbox. The issue isn't why that girl became pregnant, the issue is that a child is being forced by her state's govermment to carry a baby to term. If you can't grasp that, and only want to wag your finger at a child for getting pregnant, then don't bother responding to me. Your inflated sense of moral superiority has nothing to do with the issue at hand.
Again, none of that is the issue at hand. Forget about the 16 year old girl. You're stuck on her instead of the actual point.I’m not pretending to be superior at all.
Sex leads to pregnancy everywhere on this planet no matter the legality of an abortion.
So I’m saying it’s better to teach the children that there are consequences for their actions and that life doesn’t always have an undo button.
It may hurt her (her consequence) but it’ll show other kids that they must be responsible because killing your kid will no longer be a form of birth control at your avail.
We shouldn’t continue letting people think that you can kill your baby when you no longer what it.
She is being blocked from a medical procedure just like we block people from euthanasia. Some medical procedures are outlawed and abortion is one of them.Again, none of that is the issue at hand. Forget about the 16 year old girl. You're stuck on her instead of the actual point.
THE ISSUE IS THAT A FEMALE IS BEING OBSTRUCTED BY HER STATE'S GOVERNMENT TO RECEIVE A MEDICAL PROCEDURE.
Your opinion on how girls should be raised has absolutely nothing to do with the legal issue.
She is being blocked from a medical procedure just like we block people from euthanasia. Some medical procedures are outlawed and abortion is one of them.
He has nothing to do with women's health being at risk because they can't have a legal abortion. A condom won't prevent a woman being forced to struggle through an ectopic pregnancy.
He is your friend.
But you guys aren't talking about ectopic pregnancies. You're debating about a 16 year old being pregnant and whether she should be allowed to have an abortion.He has nothing to do with women's health being at risk because they can't have a legal abortion. A condom won't prevent a woman being forced to struggle through an ectopic pregnancy.
Wrong. Nesut was stuck on the girl's age. I had to steer him past that; and I'll try to do the same with you, so I'll say this one last time: the issue at hand isn't that one particular teenager, the issue is ANY female being forced by her state to bring to term a child that she may not want, can't afford, or can't safely carry.But you guys aren't talking about ectopic pregnancies. You're debating about a 16 year old being pregnant and whether she should be allowed to have an abortion.
You can't compare a medical emergency or a victim of a sexual assault to someone not willing to take accountability for their actions. There are people who say women should get as many abortions as they want until they are ready to start a family (by then, the womb is useless). Some feel abortions should be allowed up until the 2nd year of life. What do we do then? Abortions are a nasty piece of work. No one wants to talk about the emotional or physical toll it takes on a person. Don't get me started on what they do with the aborted fetuses...
I can't speak on the issue of this 16 year old because no one has stated who got her pregnant and how old they are... I believe the age of consent in Florida is 18? The bigger issue here is why has the "saftey net" around this minor failed?
View attachment 3633
Something happened and it doesn't look like any adults involved in her life truly care.
I was specifically referring to your ectopic pregnancy comment.Wrong. Nesut was stuck on the girl's age. I had to steer him past that;
That is the issue in this particular thread. It's in the first post...the issue at hand isn't that one particular teenager,
Brian Kemp isn't telling me what to do with my body. I decide when I have sex. Many women track their periods to determine timing. More women should do this and it should be taught, TBH. If I'm in a medical emergency that threatens my life, I also have options available to me as well. Removing ectopic pregnancies are not considered abortions.If, as a woman, you are okay with Brian Kemp telling you what to do with your body, then cool.
No one is telling your wife, sister, or daughter what they can do with theirs, either. All actions have consequences, whether good or bad. Sex is a reproductive act regardless of what society has us believing. As I mentioned before, if they changed the definition of abortion to terminating a pregnancy up to 2 years of age, would you be this passionate about it? Some states are trying to let women terminate up until she goes into labor... where do we stop? Slippery slopes...I'm not okay with the government telling my wife, sister, or daughter what they can do with their's.
Slapping a band-aid as messy as abortion over these issues has gotten us to this point.Young girls need to be better educated on social issues and understand they not only need to respect themselves but respect their bodies. Make use of condoms, birth control, etc. Don't just hop into bed with the first dude that gives you attention. We have a culture in America that objectifies women and teaches young girls their value is between their legs and that makes me sad.
The 16 year old was mentioned in the first post because abortion is illegal in her state of residence. That's the issue.I was specifically referring to your ectopic pregnancy comment.
That is the issue in this particular thread. It's in the first post...
That's literally what's happening here. Who do you think is preventing women in the state of Florida from getting abortions that they would otherwise choose to have? No, your Governor isn't telling you when to have sex, but he does have the authority to tell you, your sister, and your daughter that cannot terminate your pregnancies.Brian Kemp isn't telling me what to do with my body.
No one is telling your wife, sister, or daughter what they can do with theirs, either.
Goalpost moving and whataboutism. Preaching to women about making better decisions has nothing to do with their legal rights being infringed.Abortion isn't the issue. There are deep issues within our communities that need to be handled so it won't get to this point...
Abortion isn't illegal in Florida.The 16 year old was mentioned in the first post because abortion is illegal in her state of residence. That's the issue.
Again, he isn't telling you what to do with your body. If you really want an abortion, go to where they allow it.That's literally what's happening here. Who do you think is preventing women in the state of Florida from getting abortions that they would otherwise choose to have? No, your Governor isn't telling you when to have sex, but he does have the authority to tell you, your sister, and your daughter that cannot terminate your pregnancies.
Goalpost not moved and no "whataboutism". This falls on men just as much as women. If we preached to people to make better decisions more often, our communities would be in a better state. It takes two people to have sex. A pregnant 16 year old is a very serious matter and limiting the discussion to abortions will not help the next pregnant 16 year old.Goalpost moving and whataboutism. Preaching to women about making better decisions has nothing to do with their legal rights being infringed.
That's why I don't like the ruling. If the government can revoke a woman's rights, then they can revoke a man's rights as well.Again, he isn't telling you what to do with your body. If you really want an abortion, go to where they allow it.
Read the article. The girl is being prohibited by her state's government from receiving an abortion, either in state or out of state.
Goalpost not moved and no "whataboutism". This falls on men just as much as women.
Silly question and more whataboutism. Of course I wouldn't advocate killing a toddler (I've never met a woman who was still pregnant after two years), but I have no problem with sensible abortions.I notice you keep avoiding my question: "As I mentioned before, if they changed the definition of abortion to terminating a pregnancy up to 2 years of age, would you be this passionate about it? Some states are trying to let women terminate up until she goes into labor... where do we stop? Slippery slopes..." Some of you worship Molech and don't even know it.
“Sensible” is subjective. To me, sensible is in the event of rape or if going to term is going kill the mother. Outside of that, no one snuck a baby on you. You had to do a deliberate cardiovascular activity to make a baby. If you didn’t have the foresight to understand that sex = baby well hopefully you figure it out when you’re changing a diaper. Like JerriBun said, allowing abortions in this circumstance helps no one.That's why I don't like the ruling. If the government can revoke a woman's rights, then they can revoke a man's rights as well.
Silly question and more whataboutism. Of course I wouldn't advocate killing a toddler (I've never met a woman who was still pregnant after two years), but I have no problem with sensible abortions.
Like you said, "to YOU". Your opinions have nothing to do with the law.“Sensible” is subjective. To me, sensible is in the event of rape or if going to term is going kill the mother. Outside of that, no one snuck a baby on you. You had to do a deliberate cardiovascular activity to make a baby. If you didn’t have the foresight to understand that sex = baby well hopefully you figure it out when you’re changing a diaper. Like JerriBun said, allowing abortions in this circumstance helps no one.
I read the PDF. Did you? She is not blocked by the law from getting an abortion, she is being blocked from bypassing parental notice and consent. She lives with a relative and has an appointed guardian. They are not giving their consent for it, that's a big flag for me. That's why I said something has happened. We aren't getting all the facts.That's why I don't like the ruling. If the government can revoke a woman's rights, then they can revoke a man's rights as well.
Silly question and more whataboutism. Of course I wouldn't advocate killing a toddler (I've never met a woman who was still pregnant after two years), but I have no problem with sensible abortions.
That's their legal right. That right should be protected no matter how much you want to accuse those women of debauchery from your high horse.There are women using abortion as birth control instead of other less intrusive methods, or getting their tubes tied, or getting a hysterectomy.
If you’re “pro-law” then why do you have a problem with the law saying “no abortions”?Like you said, "to YOU". Your opinions have nothing to do with the law.
I never once said that I'm "pro-law". If that's what you got out of me saying that I want people's legal right's to be protected, then you might want to sit this one out.If you’re “pro-law” then why do you have a problem with the law saying “no abortions”?
Understood. Do you think unborn children should have rights?I never once said that I'm "pro-law". If that's what you got out of me saying that I want people's legal right's to be protected, then you might want to sit this one out.
For the record, I'm pro-choice when it comes to the issue of abortion.
I grew up in a Black household, I didn't have rights until I moved out of my parents' household.Understood. Do you think unborn children should have rights?
If unborn children have rights then we need to establish what they are. The federal government is saying that an unborn baby has the right to life. I don’t disagree.I grew up in a Black household, I didn't have rights until I moved out of my parents' household.
All jokes aside, I do believe that unborn children have rights. Like I told you though, our (yours and my) personal beliefs have nothing to do with our legal rights.
It's your right to agree or disagree. Hopefully, that right is never infringed upon.If unborn children have rights then we need to establish what they are. The federal government is saying that an unborn baby has the right to life. I don’t disagree.
Passive aggressive much?It's your right to agree or disagree. Hopefully, that right is never infringed upon.
No. Not at all. That was a weird question.Passive aggressive much?
Honey, the horse ain't high enough for the sickness in this world. 🙃That's their legal right. That right should be protected no matter how much you want to accuse those women of debauchery from your high horse.
Yes, because once again, that's not the issue at hand.(Slavery was legal too, remember? Or are you gonna accuse me of "whataboutism" again? 🙃)
It will be a lot easier for her to find peace without a bunch of holier-than-thou people looking down their noses at her. I too hope that she finds peace and is able she can receive the medical procedure that she needs.I just hope this young lady finds peace in whatever decision she has to make. Because it seems like there is a LOT going on in her life right now, and people are trying to make sure she is not making rash decisions rooted in grief.
So, abortion sits in a bubble and has no lasting effect on the Black community, let alone society? And I'm not allowed to compare it to something else that used to be legal??? That's crazy!Yes, because once again, that's not the issue at hand.
So, we are now "holier-than-thou" because we don't want to help society progress down a dark hole? Who's looking down their noses at her? Certainly not me. So stop projecting that nonsense on me, thanks.It will be a lot easier for her to find peace without a bunch of holier-than-thou people looking down their noses at her.
I too hope that she finds peace and is able she can receive the medical procedure that she needs.
I would much rather an unwanted pregnancy be terminated than for an unwanted child to be abused, neglected, and/or have a bad quality of life.So, abortion sits in a bubble and has no lasting effect on the Black community, let alone society? And I'm not allowed to compare it to something else that used to be legal??? That's crazy!
I know all about Margaret Sanger. She was s racist bitch, but she has nothing to do with this particular conversation. You're reaching.You should go look up Margaret Sanger and Planned Parenthood. Cuz.... YIKES! Y'all making her proud.
You're acting holier-than-thou because you keep judging that girl (and other women) as if you have a Heaven or a Hell into which to cast her. Just because she, or anyone else has an unwanted pregnancy, that doesn't mean that they live a life of debauchery. Those were your words, I wasn't projecting.So, we are now "holier-than-thou" because we don't want to help society progress down a dark hole? Who's looking down their noses at her? Certainly not me. So stop projecting that nonsense on me, thanks.
IF she ends up regretting her abortion, then there are counseling services available to help ease the trauma. Also, at 16, she's young enough to get pregnant again when she's physically, mentally, and financially prepared to deliver a child on her terms.So what happens if she regrets getting an abortion. What say you? Since we are too "holier-than-thou" to have an opinion... 🤔
Then encourage actions to nip the root cause of unwanted pregnancies. No more band-aids. The cycle will never end.I would much rather an unwanted pregnancy be terminated than for an unwanted child to be abused, neglected, and/or have a bad quality of life.
Nah. This is her legacy, like it or not. I'm not reaching because you dont want me bringing her up.I know all about Margaret Sanger. She was s racist bitch, but she has nothing to do with this particular conversation. You're reaching.
I didnt say she led a life of debauchery... This is what I said:You're acting holier-than-thou because you keep judging that girl (and other women) as if you have a Heaven or a Hell into which to cast her. Just because she, or anyone else has an unwanted pregnancy, that doesn't mean that they live a life of debauchery. Those were your words, I wasn't projecting.
People have sex with anyone that tickles their fancy these days. But don't worry if you get pregnant, just get an abortion and continue the behavior that put you in the position to need an abortion in the first place. It's debauchery to act like this and expect to have a healthy society for people to thrive in. It's common sense. There is a root issue not being addressed here.These issues are slippery slopes that open gateways to more debauched behavior. There are women using abortion as birth control instead of other less intrusive methods, or getting their tubes tied, or getting a hysterectomy.
Bro, she's already IN counseling... No biological parents, suffering through the death of a friend and deciding on another death while processing her grief. You also don't know her medical history or health situation to say she can get pregnant again. And again, all she needs to do is get parental consent go through with an abortion, but she's trying to bypass that.IF she ends up regretting her abortion, then there are counseling services available to help ease the trauma. Also, at 16, she's young enough to get pregnant again when she's physically, mentally, and financially prepared to deliver a child on her terms.
I don't care who you bring up, but Margaret Sanger has nothing to do with protecting a female's right to an abortion.Nah. This is her legacy, like it or not. I'm not reaching because you dont want me bringing her up.
That's their right. You have the right to do the same. You should appreciate that freedom.People have sex with anyone that tickles their fancy these days.
I never said that. You're talking about using abortion as birth control; I'm talking about protecting a woman's legal right to make her own choices. I support that, and I stand on that.But don't worry if you get pregnant, just get an abortion and continue the behavior that put you in the position to need an abortion in the first place.
Fighting for a woman’s choice to murder her own baby because her money isn’t right?I don't care who you bring up, but Margaret Sanger has nothing to do with protecting a female's right to an abortion.
That's their right. You have the right to do the same. You should appreciate that freedom.
I never said that. You're talking about using abortion as birth control; I'm talking about protecting a woman's legal right to make her own choices. I support that, and I stand on that.
Neither of us is going to change the other's mind, and we've gone back and forth long enough. I'm getting off so I can start my evening. You enjoy yours. ✌🏾
I read articles from decades ago talking about how abortions will help keep BLACK populations under control and this was what the founder of Planned Parenthood also believed in. Now look at the state of the average black woman in America. "Miss Independent, don't need no man!" who is in college and will likely end up bed wenching to a white man in her late 30s after aborting 2+ black babies from her youth.Slapping a band-aid as messy as abortion over these issues has gotten us to this point.
I said fighting to protect a female's legal right to decide what she wants to do with and to her body.Fighting for a woman’s choice to murder her own baby because her money isn’t right?
You're thinking short term. Once you open the door for the government to take away one person's rights, then you put everybody at for the same infringement.You’re thinking very short term.
How do you know what knowledge a woman who chooses to get an abortion possess? Whether or not she knows about safe sex isn't the issue. Her legal right to make that choice for herself is.Allowing her to kill her baby fixes her short term issue but in the long term she does not learn the lesson of safe sex.
That's their right.In the long term more and more young women do not learn about safe sex and the importance of choosing a good partner because they can always alt + f4 the baby.
Talking about what should or shouldn't have been allowed is whataboutism. We're here now. In reality, if a woman wants to get an abortion, that's her right. That right should be protected.Abortion for reasons outside of the mother’s immediate health should have never been allowed. But we know it was because it was a way of genociding Black Americans before they even put two feet on the ground.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?