Poll: Abortion for minors.

[Edwardo Piet]

If there's some good, that does nothing in and of itself if there is also some bad, until you first do your best to judge which there is more of (good or bad) and to what degree.

EvF

[Retorth]

I do think it's an equal good and bad, therefore it isn't all bad. The rule, whether it is positive or not, depends on the situation of those involved. I've already explained it three times I reckon so I'm not gonna type it out again lol

But to sum it up, if the parents are loving and supporting and just want to help, this rule helps them reach out to their children, especially in a terrifying situation such as this. If the parents are screwed up, then this rule is nothing good for the children in question. It's just that we are so quick to see the bad of it and go "Nope this sucks" but there is never a perfect solution in this world. There are better solutions of course, hence the counselors

Can you see what I'm trying to say?

[Edwardo Piet]

I agree with the counselling, but I wholeheartedly disagree with this law overall.

You say there is good and bad, that's one thing, but to say it's equal - I don't see how you judge that?

I think the possible negativity is worse. For it to be possible for anyone to have the power to force an underage mother to keep her baby against her will, I see as preposterous, highly unjust.

I don't know of any possible good that could possibly come out of the law that's as good as that possibility is bad.

As I said though, I agree with the counselling. That's just positive in my view.

EvF

[Violet]

The bad is present enough here for me to consider it a significant degree.

I'll share some of the comments from those polled tomorrow sometime, mostly because I'd like you to see where I'm coming from, and to have read the same things i read (and see your conclusions to each of them of course). I think you will find none of them too interesting, a few of them plain stupid, and a most of them poorly justified by conservatism.

[Retorth]

But to sum it up, if the parents are loving and supporting and just want to help, this rule helps them reach out to their children, especially in a terrifying situation such as this. If the parents are screwed up, then this rule is nothing good for the children in question.

Like I said above. Thats where there is possible good. But anyway, I definitely wouldn't support this rule itself. I'd vote for a more flexible rule. I agree with you on choice.

[binny]

I'll have to say that there are just some times that a child is being a brat and no amount of time out or talking to them will help. Sometimes they need a good whack or two.

As the mother of a child with Asperger Syndrome this kind of attitude angers me to no end. What you think may be a bratty child in reality may be a child unable to communicate correctly on how they fill or how their environment affects them. Just because a child throws a tantrum doesn't mean that child is a brat. I'm sick of hearing sickening statements like "All that child needs is a good spanking".

Asperger Syndrome;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asperger_syndrome

[Violet]

Thank you for that Binny, i didn't know a good way to approach dlf about that

[Violet]

Clarion Question Results:

Yes: "If someone is going to do an evasive procedure on my child, I have a right to know!"-Lucy, Kasilof

No: "Although abortion is a serious issue and the family should be consulted, it remains a personal decision. It is a difficult choice to make. One that should be made after extensive discussion with family, not under mandate of the parents. Often, abortions happen in secrecy because the child is scared of what the family would think."-Nick, Sterling

Yes: "Yes, of course! If we hadn't totally removed the Ten COmmandments and prayer to God from schools and our lives, many of our children would understand the consequence of premarital sex and not compounding their troubles with killing their babies due to bad sex since Roe vs Wade is not a healthy society. The shame and guilt of killing these babies can never be escaped by these women/girls no matter what others tell them by saying its OK!"-Glen, Soldotna

No: "What if a girl's parents have different religious views than she? SHe has to pay for it for the rest of her life in a country of religious freedom."-Amy, Sterling

---

More:

Yes: "As a registered nurse working in a local clinic, we are not even able to take a noninvasive temp or blood pressure of a minor without parental consent, yet our young children are able to have a surgery that is what an abortion is without parental consent. This does not make sense at all."-Kaye, Kenai

No: "According to our current laws, minors can be sexually active without the consent of their parents. Our laws should allow minors to make decisions regarding their reproductive health without parental consent as well."-Kathy, Sterling

Yes: "A minor is the responsibility of the parent until they are not a minor. If any doctor touched my child without consent there would be a large legal mess, because i would press charges against that doctor for 'touching' my child."-Garnet, Nikolaevsk

No: Calm down people. Stop with the 'Juno' movie hysteria. If you are a good parent and have open communication with your child one of two things will happen: 1) They will not get pregnant; or 2) If they made a mistake and got pregnant they would talk to you before an abortion. This is for the thousands of teens out there who have abusive, overbearing or overly religious parents who would only make their life more hell."-Sue, Soldotna

Yes: "Parents are responsible for the children's decisions and well-being. The government should not have the right to intervene in that responsibility."-Tom, Kenai

The lights in my classroom just got turned off, because they are watching 'The Princess Bride' SO i can't post the last two "yes" opinions yet

[Samson]

Samson,

We've discussed that this legislation has good and bad consequences. You cannot really fully support nor fully despise it. Think about the good side of it being that children, through this rule, are encouraged to speak to their parents about it. Some get terrified but don't realize their parents love them and would only want to help. With such a rule, they have to talk to their parents and get the help they require.

This is, of course, the ideal situation which is not always the case. But my point is, why don't you try not to take such a dim view of it and see the possibility. Anyway, we also decided in the discussion above that it would actually be better to have a rule that requires compulsory counseling instead of compulsory parent involvement. That way if a child doesn't wish to tell her parents, she just has to speak to a counselor. This would certain be a lot better don't you think.

Point is, why do you need to have a piece of legislation in place to have your kids talk to you?? Again, this bill will lead to many others that will ultimately be having the Government decide for you, and not "YOU" the parent.

I am not for this bill at all, and simply due to the fact that there are more problems that can come from it than help.

[Violet]

And since when is "YOU" the parent deciding a necessarily good thing? A great many things in our republic are unjust, and those things must be made just before i will want to live in this republic.