No Abortion Options Lead to...

The Cauldron's server is expensive and requires monthly payments. Please become a Bronze, Silver or Gold Donor if you can. Donations are needed every month. Without member support, we can't afford the server.

Or donate directly via Paypal

This message board is The Cauldron: A Pagan Forum's SMF Archive Board. It is closed to new memberships and to posting, but there are over 250,000 messages here that you can still search and read -- many full of interesting and useful information. (This board was open from February 2007 through June 2011).

Our new vBulletin discussion board is located at http://www.ecauldron.com/forum/ -- if you would like to participate in discussions like those you see here, please visit our new vBulletin message board, register an account and join in our discussions. We hope you will find the information in this message archive useful and will consider joining us on our new board.

[sailor_tech]

So, I found a website about judicial bypass. I'll post the link, of course, so that way you can find a new argument to weasel your way out of what I'm going to point out. From said website...

My emphasis, in case you wanted to know. So, the first step for this thirteen year old, who probably had no access to law textbooks or even thought that the law could possibly help her, since you know, everyone knows that you need parental consent in the state, would be to contact a local abortion center. In a religious area, doing Google searches on computers in a public venue for such things is just a no-no. So, maybe her parents gave her a personal computer. She's probably pretty paranoid Mommy and Daddy are going to walk in while she's jotting down local PP addresses. But, again, you credit this child with a mental faculty well beyond her years, so let's say she were to jot them all down. Then she has to contact them and ask for help.

Again, the KOS author is lying about the state of the law. Simple yes or no question for you to answer with regards to that.

From what you wrote above (and maybe from part of what I snipped), parental consent laws are NOT the problem. So the KOS author's point is totally wrong. 13 yr old girls are going to have self-induced abortions if their parents don't help wether there is parental consent, judicial by-pass or maybe even a clinic 5 minutes down the road.

BTW, I found the site you mentioned at the start of this thread.

And you might want to look at how the court system works. Appeals are 3 judges.

[sailor_tech]

How do you know? She has the right to ask for judicial by-pass. That is not the same as having access.

You don't know if she had legal access. If the judge heard her and decided she wasn't allowed, than the statement she didn't have access is fully truthful, correct, and qualified. But neither of us know, do we?

Come on. I know you can read English better than this.

[sailor_tech]

Not if the comments I've been seeing in response to articles about this issue is any indication.

The pro-life crowd, Peter, is far from pro-life. They are pro-birth. That's it. Once an exit is made from the uterus, that's it. I kid you not. Some of the comments I read in the state's papers were just appalling. The ignorance and cruelty was just startling.

Which is why my idea would be so much fun as showing of hypocrasy.

[Inca]

Come on. I know you can read English better than this.

Let's assume I do not, and you actually explain it, rather than imply.

[Inca]

Which is why my idea would be so much fun as showing of hypocrasy.

'Fun'... That must be a consolation.

[sailor_tech]

Let's assume I do not, and you actually explain it, rather than imply.

OK, in baby English.

If the law says a judge may permit abortion without having to get parental consent, then there is legal option to abortion without parental consent.

Wether that is viable is irrelevent to a claim that parental consent laws prevent legal access.  

[Star]

Come on. I know you can read English better than this.

There's no call for that, Peter.  I'm a native speaker and I have the same issue Inca does about this.  Having the option to ask a judge to bypass the requirement does not equal having access.  If the judge chooses to turn her down, then she has no access.  The law provides the possibility of access; that's not the same as providing access full stop.  It might possibly be a matter of interpretation, but implying that only someone who does not read English fluently could possibly disagree with you about that interpretation is a bit over the top.

[Star]

Guys,

This is getting really heated and some comments are being made that are getting a bit close to the "personal attack" line.  Let's all try to keep this civil, please.  If the thread is upsetting you too much, consider taking a break or leaving it entirely.  Heated discussions are no problem, of course, but it does not help the conversation to make it personal.  Discuss the issues, not the personalities.

Thanks.

Star
Cauldron Message Board Coordinator

[sailor_tech]

There's no call for that, Peter.  I'm a native speaker and I have the same issue Inca does about this.  Having the option to ask a judge to bypass the requirement does not equal having access.  If the judge chooses to turn her down, then she has no access.  The law provides the possibility of access; that's not the same as providing access full stop.  It might possibly be a matter of interpretation, but implying that only someone who does not read English fluently could possibly disagree with you about that interpretation is a bit over the top.

Read back. It's not about effective access, it's about legal access per the originial KOS article. People want to discuss effective access despite it being legal fine. Look at my response to Madrina on page 2.

[catherine]

Considering she wasn't married, spousal consent is irrelevent to this, wether constitional or not.

Maybe it isn't relevant to this particular situation, being about a 13 year old girl. It's extremely relevant to the issue of abortion access. If you don't want to talk about that, fine. However, some of us might want to talk about the bigger picture. Which is, these laws were intentionally designed to put obstacles in a woman's way when she's seeking to terminate a pregnancy. They were designed to restrict abortion access, plain and simple.

Also, I have a question. If judicial bypass was your point in the first place, why didn't you just say that? We could have discussed that portion of the law four pages ago.

[treekisser]

Read back. It's not about effective access, it's about legal access per the originial KOS article. People want to discuss effective access despite it being legal fine. Look at my response to Madrina on page 2.

1. 'Legal access' isn't a term of art. Therefore, it doesn't have a fixed legal meaning and can refer to effective legal access.

2. If you click on the 'legal access' link it goes to a story where the term clearly isn't being used as a term of art but as social commentary ('no real legal access'). So the blog is probably using it that way too.

3. A blog isn't a court of law. Absolute precision isn't required, especially not for non-legal terms.

4. Even if a blog was a court of law, and 'legal access' was a term of art, given that this sounds like an error rather than deliberate lie, do you really think a judge would just suddenly slam the desk, say AHA! UR LYING!! NOW I DON'T NEED TO LISTEN TO ANY OF UR ACTUAL ARGUMENTS!!! OFF WITH HIS HEAD MWAHAHAHA!!!!11!

5. The actual arguments in this case being the guilt of the alleged rapist and broader social issues, including access to abortion.

[Star]

Read back. It's not about effective access, it's about legal access per the originial KOS article. People want to discuss effective access despite it being legal fine. Look at my response to Madrina on page 2.

If the judge turns down her request, how does she have legal access?

[catherine]

It's the intent of the law that is significant

This is what a lot of people don't get. Saying it's no big deal because she can just get the ok from a judge doesn't take into account exactly what that means. The question that I've always had about that is, if the judge (or judges, depending on how many times she has to appeal) doesn't think she's mature enough to make her own decisions about an abortion, how on earth is she supposed to be mature enough to have a baby? What then, is she supposed to do? Try and raise the child that she didn't want? Be forced to go full term against her will, deliver, then give it away to someone else? Are either of these things easier, safer, or somehow less damaging than an abortion might be?

[LyricFox]

Which is why my idea would be so much fun as showing of hypocrasy.

I think they're immune to hypocrisy. I honestly don't see how they can say what they say otherwise.

[sailor_tech]

Maybe it isn't relevant to this particular situation, being about a 13 year old girl. It's extremely relevant to the issue of abortion access. If you don't want to talk about that, fine. However, some of us might want to talk about the bigger picture. Which is, these laws were intentionally designed to put obstacles in a woman's way when she's seeking to terminate a pregnancy. They were designed to restrict abortion access, plain and simple.

Also, I have a question. If judicial bypass was your point in the first place, why didn't you just say that? We could have discussed that portion of the law four pages ago.

My point has been that the article is wrong as to law being why the girl did a self-induced abortion.

[Tags:]

Jump to: Please select a destination: ----------------------------- About The Cauldron ----------------------------- => Rules and Regulations => Cauldron Announcements ===> Volunteers Needed: Site Assistants and Projects => Introductions => Board Questions, Suggestions, and Feedback => Chat and CauldronMUX Support => Test Board ----------------------------- Religion and Philosophy ----------------------------- => Paganism For Beginners => Books and Other Resources => Pagan Religions => Pagan Spirituality => Gods, Goddesses, and Mythology => Worship and Ritual => Holidays and Festivals => History and Religion => Faith in Everyday Life => Philosophy and Metaphysics => Non-Pagan Religions and Interfaith Discussions => Miscellaneous Religious Discussions ----------------------------- Magic and the Occult ----------------------------- => Magic and the Occult for Beginners => Witchcraft, Hoodoo, and Folk Magic => The Western Magical Tradition => Chaos Magic => Lodges and Other Magic Organizations => Miscellaneous Magical Discussions ----------------------------- Special Interest Groups & Special Discussions ----------------------------- => Special Topic Discussions => Chavi Memorial Chronic Illness SIG => General SIGS ===> College Pagans SIG ===> Cooking SIG ===> Divination SIG ===> Home and Garden SIG ===> Pagan Parents SIG ===> Teen Pagans SIG => Religious SIGS ===> Asatru and Heathenry SIG ===> Cauldron Cill ===> FlameKeeping SIG ===> Hazel and Oak: A Celtic Polytheism SIG ===> Neo-Druidry SIG ===> Reformed Kemeticism SIG ===> Ta Hiera Hellenic Polytheism SIG => Book/Media Discussion Boards ===> Academic Book Discussions ===> Pagan Religion Book Discussions ===> Magick Book Discussions ===> Fiction Book Discussions ===> DVD/Video Discussions ----------------------------- Life, the Universe, and Everything Else ----------------------------- => Pagan Announcements => Prayer and Energy Requests => News and Politics ===> Religious News ===> Non-Religious News ===> Political Discussions => Social Discussion Boards ===> Art, Poetry and Writing ===> Books ===> Computers and the Internet ===> Crafts and Hobbies ===> Family Life ===> Gaming ===> Health and Medicine ===> Humor and Quizzes ===> Music, Television, and Film ===> Pets ===> Science and Technology ===> Sports and Recreation