Poll: Abortion for minors.

[Minimalist]

there is a heavy link between christianity and believing that minors should require parental consent to abort

I think that you are giving them way too much credit, Saerules. What they think is that minors shouldn't be fucking and if they get knocked up then it SERVES THEM RIGHT.

Xtians are mainly sanctimonious bastards.

[Violet]

Fr0do... that is what my parents think... what 70% of Clarion Poll-takers think...

But did it occur to any of them that they are tyrants? All 70% of those are oppressive rulers... who try to justify their actions as being good without sound reason.

---

there is a heavy link between christianity and believing that minors should require parental consent to abort

I think that you are giving them way too much credit, Saerules. What they think is that minors shouldn't be fucking and if they get knocked up then it SERVES THEM RIGHT.

Xtians are mainly sanctimonious bastards.

I think you're right... +rep for you for that.

---

Hmm... the Christian stats don't look so good right yet... 1 0f 1 has voted for it to become law. That is 100% of them so far > . > Sadly, that's probably the only christian who will take the poll.

[fr0d0]

Fr0do... that is what my parents think... what 70% of Clarion Poll-takers think...

But did it occur to any of them that they are tyrants? All 70% of those are oppressive rulers... who try to justify their actions as being good without sound reason.

You don't seem to be making any point. Could you make one please so I can consider it? /justify your statement. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'd just like to understand your reasoning.

[Violet]

Sure:
oppress |əˈpres|
verb [ trans. ] (often be oppressed)
keep (someone) in subservience and hardship, esp. by the unjust exercise of authority : a system that oppressed working people | [as adj. ] ( oppressed) oppressed racial minorities.
• cause (someone) to feel distressed, anxious, or uncomfortable : he was oppressed by some secret worry.

Raising children is expensive, difficult, and when you are unprepared for it, and forced to do it: unjust.

To exercise the authority to force a person to have a child they are not ready for: that is both selfish, and unjust.

It is selfish, because you are putting both mother and child in a horrible position they cannot get out of ... and reducing the quality of their lives intentionally. All for your own personal 'rightness', and as Minimalist correctly said:

I think that you are giving them way too much credit, Saerules. What they think is that minors shouldn't be fucking and if they get knocked up then it SERVES THEM RIGHT.

Xtians are mainly sanctimonious bastards.

Which is quite unjust. And that they would knowledgeably commit this cruel and unjust act of oppression upon those they rule over with absolute authority: They become a

Tyrant |ˈtīrənt|
noun
1 a cruel and oppressive ruler : the tyrant was deposed by popular demonstrations.
• a person exercising power or control in a cruel, unreasonable, or arbitrary way : her father was a tyrant and a bully.
• (esp. in ancient Greece) a ruler who seized power without legal right.

Therefore, quite logically: those parents are tyrants.

[fr0d0]

Good. Thanks. I have something to go on then.

Raising children is expensive, difficult, and when you are unprepared for it, and forced to do it: unjust.

To exercise the authority to force a person to have a child they are not ready for: that is both selfish, and unjust.

It is selfish, because you are putting both mother and child in a horrible position they cannot get out of ... and reducing the quality of their lives intentionally. All for your own personal 'rightness',

You're now talking about something seemingly unrelated to the point. That is parents forcing something horrible onto their child. So you're saying the bill gives parents the power to abuse their children legally? What about the parents guidance to protect their children from the harm you describe? Doesn't that work both ways? We are, after all, talking about legal minors here, who society has decided are not yet adult and deemed not mature enough to survive in the big bad world away from their parents. Of course all cases are different, and I wouldn't like to generalise personally.

and as Minimalist correctly said:

minors shouldn't be fucking and if they get knocked up then it SERVES THEM RIGHT.

Which is quite unjust. And that they would knowledgeably commit this cruel and unjust act of oppression upon those they rule over with absolute authority: They become a Tyrant

So absolving yourself from your moral responsibility (for arguments sake) makes you less evil than someone who would seek to abuse a child? I don't think that's logically sound. You should always take the responsibility you own. Laws are generally formulated to result in a least harm scenario. I think you're protestations are far outweighed by the positives so far.

[dry land fish]

I voted 'for' as a Christian, before reading any opinions here. Mostly because I just discussed it briefly with my wife (as she's far more knowledgeable on the subject than I am), and she thought that if a parent is legally responsible for a child then they should know what the child is doing. That and that a child could think they were free to choose unsafe sex outside parental blessing. Parents have a responsibility, it's a natural and good thing.

Right. They are the parent and they should act as a parent. People can't expect the law to raise their children for them. Some girls get pregnant and their parents are completely against abortion or even sex before marriage. It can happen to anyone and I always say that it's just not sensible to even suggest that "my kid won't do that" because they will. When it comes to sex, drugs, and alcohol chances are your kid will do it. Parents really need to have strong relationships with their kids so that their kids can talk to them about sex and other issues. Some kids would never tell their parents they were even thinking of sex for fear that their parents would get mad or yell at them. Those types of situations at home get kids into trouble by setting them up for failure.

My mom took me to get birth control when I got my first serious boyfriend. We had people who would come from the free health clinics and give out condoms at school. Not all of my friends had parents that would let them get contraception. I never understood that.

[Tiberius]

I love how fr0d0 has changed his religion to a "Christianarchist" and yet he fully supports controlling parents and strict regulation. Doesn't sound anything like anarchy to me. You are just a walking contradiction sometimes fr0d0.

[Violet]

You're now talking about something seemingly unrelated to the point. That is parents forcing something horrible onto their child. So you're saying the bill gives parents the power to abuse their children legally? What about the parents guidance to protect their children from the harm you describe? Doesn't that work both ways? We are, after all, talking about legal minors here, who society has decided are not yet adult and deemed not mature enough to survive in the big bad world away from their parents. Of course all cases are different, and I wouldn't like to generalise personally.

It does give them the power to do so, and it is something horrible to be forced into. If a girl will not otherwise tell her parents that she is pregnant: those parents were not worth telling in the first place. That is why this bill is wrong... because it lets bad parents stop an abortion from happening. Society's idea of 'adult' is wrong, Fr0do... and in it being wrong: millions of 'children' suffer and/or are held back from success. Nobody... ever... has... the... right... to... do... that. Not one person... not 10 people... not a society... and not gods.

So absolving yourself from your moral responsibility (for arguments sake) makes you less evil than someone who would seek to abuse a child? I don't think that's logically sound. You should always take the responsibility you own. Laws are generally formulated to result in a least harm scenario. I think you're protestations are far outweighed by the positives so far.

A person who admits to their faults, their crimes, their accidents... that person is worth a thousand who would lie about their faults, justify their crimes, and deny their accidents. The former is humble... it is truthful... while their faults, crimes, and accidents may be terrible: those people are not truly evil. It is those from the latter group, those like Hitler... like Stalin... like Osama Bin Laden... those people are truly evil.

Laws are generally formulated to result in a least harm scenario? What was American slavery again? What is this anti-abortion bill? How about the death penalty, and torture laws? And anti-women's rights laws that are in so many Muslim countries right now? Least harm? Really?

Edit: Did what you wanted, Mike

[fr0d0]

I love how fr0d0 has changed his religion to a "Christianarchist" and yet he fully supports controlling parents and strict regulation. Doesn't sound anything like anarchy to me. You are just a walking contradiction sometimes fr0d0.

As I said I was essentially putting forward my Wife's POV. Plus Christianarchy still respects Govt rule. Anarchy it isn't.

[Tiberius]

So why is it a combination of the words "Christian" and "anarchist"? Unless I'm making some big mistake here about how you got the word...