10-year-old's pregnancy

[Samson]

And Note Allie can not back up her racist statement that latinos have this problem in their families more than other ethnic groups?

You oughta begin a thread about that......somewhere else....You're smart enough to do it!!

 

[AllieBaba]

And Note Allie can not back up her racist statement that latinos have this problem in their families more than other ethnic groups?

Sure I can.

"California State Law §288(a) defines any sexual contact between a person 18 or older with someone under the age of 14 as illegal and punishable by incarceration. Data from the State Department of Justice shows that Young, Unassimilated Hispanic Offenders (YUHO) are arrested for these crimes at rates disproportionately greater than their numbers in the population. "
SpringerLink - Journal Article

It's obviously a cultural thing. NOT genetic.

 

[Truthmatters]

"This is a huge problem for the Mexican/Hispanic population. I'm not sure why." alli's quote on child sex abuse

I dont see young unassimulated latino in your remark Allie.

 

[Samson]

This is a huge problem for the Mexican/Hispanic population. I'm not sure why.

I dont see young unassimulated latino in your remark Allie.

So, you're not smart enough to begin your own thread?

 

[strollingbones]

so basically pro birthers....why do you allow any allowances

 

[Truthmatters]

No the tea party backers are not racist huh?

 

[California Girl]

No the tea party backers are not racist huh?

You're a partisan hack, truth. And not a very smart one.

 

[Samson]

No the tea party backers are not racist huh?

You're a partisan hack, truth. And not a very smart one.

Plus, its boring me enough to have reported the troll.

 

[strollingbones]

No the tea party backers are not racist huh?

You're a partisan hack, truth. And not a very smart one.

Plus, its boring me enough to have reported the troll.

what? you can report people for what? i only report ads

 

[Truthmatters]

No the tea party backers are not racist huh?

You're a partisan hack, truth. And not a very smart one.

Plus, its boring me enough to have reported the troll.

How did I break any rule here to be reported?

 

[AllieBaba]

Is chronic stupidity a reportable offense?

Hallelujah!

 

[Madeline]

Fine.

If your daughter is raped and impregnated when she's 10, force her to have the baby.

I bet that will make everything just hunky dory.

My point isn't to determine what is "just hunky dory."

My point is to have an anti-abortionist stand by their convictions:

A. Life Begins at Conception
B. Taking Life is Immoral

So far, none have stepped up, but instead have wallowed through the slippery slope of moral relativity.

Oh bullshit. It's a pro-abortionist stance that people who are pro-life are rabidly pro-life even at the expense of the life of the mother.

Nobody is, and nobody ever has been. While this sort of case is exceedingly rare, as is pointed out all the time, that doesn't mean any of us would say it's best to let both children die, when you can save one.

Pardon me, but Sarah Palin is. She does not believe in abortion under any circumstances. The woman is a wing nut.

 

[Shogun]

I don't know the stats but I'm fairly certain that a good number of "pro life" people agree it might be necesary in cases of rape or incest. And like luissa said, her life could be in danger.

And the girl I mentioned was also Mexican, I had a gut feeling from the get go, it was a relative. I believe that's why they gave her so little time in jail.But of course the news never mentioned it.

Sickos.

I agree with you.

But, whenever there's an antiabortion thread, there's always someone that claims LIFE has begun with conception, and ENDING LIFE is an abomination, regardless of the circumstances.

This arguement is oddly silent in this thread.

i'm willing to bet that you can't find a single anti-abortion quote from anyone here at USMB that doesn't also add the caveat "unless cases of incest, rape, etc".

how dramatic. Were you a theater major in college?

 

[Shogun]

I agree.

But, its still LIFE, right?

Yes, it's life at conception. Abortion for a 10 year old is self defense. Self defense is acceptable in every society. Now if you want to talk about the woman that last I heard had 5 abortions and uses it as a method of birth control, well, let's just say you won't find me defending that tramp any time soon.

So, its OK to take life......as long as you find the circumstances acceptable?

in the case of rape, yes. Is this the strawman effect you were looking for?

 

[Shogun]

You are mistaken in assuming that I am an absolutist on this topic.

Women have controlled contraception and pregnancy with herbs for millennia for a variety of reasons, good and bad. Saving the life of a 10 year old girl is one of the good reasons.

No, I'm really not examining any one individual's opinion.

I'm exploring the broader question: How can anti-abortionists be morally relativistic?

Either you BELIEVE that life begins at conception, and is sacred (not to be given or taken by mankind), or you do not.

I agree with you, in that I do not believe life begins at conception, and/or is not sacred, and that mankind can decide whether or not to take life.

ahh yes.. the false dichotomy. bravo!

 

[Samson]

I don't know the stats but I'm fairly certain that a good number of "pro life" people agree it might be necesary in cases of rape or incest. And like luissa said, her life could be in danger.

And the girl I mentioned was also Mexican, I had a gut feeling from the get go, it was a relative. I believe that's why they gave her so little time in jail.But of course the news never mentioned it.

Sickos.

I agree with you.

But, whenever there's an antiabortion thread, there's always someone that claims LIFE has begun with conception, and ENDING LIFE is an abomination, regardless of the circumstances.

This arguement is oddly silent in this thread.

i'm willing to bet that you can't find a single anti-abortion quote from anyone here at USMB that doesn't also add the caveat "unless cases of incest, rape, etc".

how dramatic. Were you a theater major in college?

Yes, it's life at conception. Abortion for a 10 year old is self defense. Self defense is acceptable in every society. Now if you want to talk about the woman that last I heard had 5 abortions and uses it as a method of birth control, well, let's just say you won't find me defending that tramp any time soon.

So, its OK to take life......as long as you find the circumstances acceptable?

in the case of rape, yes. Is this the strawman effect you were looking for?

You are mistaken in assuming that I am an absolutist on this topic.

Women have controlled contraception and pregnancy with herbs for millennia for a variety of reasons, good and bad. Saving the life of a 10 year old girl is one of the good reasons.

No, I'm really not examining any one individual's opinion.

I'm exploring the broader question: How can anti-abortionists be morally relativistic?

Either you BELIEVE that life begins at conception, and is sacred (not to be given or taken by mankind), or you do not.

I agree with you, in that I do not believe life begins at conception, and/or is not sacred, and that mankind can decide whether or not to take life.

ahh yes.. the false dichotomy. bravo!

I know a thread has maxed out its stupidity quotient when Shogun posts 1/25.

 

[Againsheila]

So, its OK to take life......as long as you find the circumstances acceptable?

Again, self defense is acceptable in every society. If someone put's your child's life in danger, are you going to stand by and just let that person kill/harm her?

I'm just trying to define under what circumstances you feel taking life is OK.

You say its OK if its is for "self defense," right?

Yes it is okay to take a life in self defense. Ideally you would never have to.

 

[Amanda]

Now you're just playing games, which is childish.

It's been a childish game from the beginning.

I've always been kinda fascinated by guns, 1 might say I like guns. So then, let's come up with a specific, 1 in a million unlikely scenario and see how my general statement holds up... Oh would you like guns if 1 was pointed at your head?

Duh.

The whole point of the thread was to challenge pro-lifer's beliefs and make them look foolish by using a bizarre, unlikely occurrence that the general statement was never intended to cover.

The whole exercise has been mental masturbation.

Gee, pro-lifer's haven't been rushing in to defend their position. I wonder why? Maybe because the premise was stupid?

 

[Samson]

Now you're just playing games, which is childish.

It's been a childish game from the beginning.

I've always been kinda fascinated by guns, 1 might say I like guns. So then, let's come up with a specific, 1 in a million unlikely scenario and see how my general statement holds up... Oh would you like guns if 1 was pointed at your head?

Duh.

The whole point of the thread was to challenge pro-lifer's beliefs and make them look foolish by using a bizarre, unlikely occurrence that the general statement was never intended to cover.

The whole exercise has been mental masturbation.

Gee, pro-lifer's haven't been rushing in to defend their position. I wonder why? Maybe because the premise was stupid?

The position is undefendable.

But its easier just to stomp your little feet, and say the premise is "stupid."

1. You believe life begins at conception.

OK. No Problemo.

2. Then, you believe life is sacred.

Ok, again: No Problem

3. Finally, you believe Abortion is Immoral

Given the two preceeding beliefs, this makes sense.

4. Then you begin to qualify Abortions using Moral Relativity, e.g. the "self defense" clause.

What? "self defense?" We may as well qualify All Abortions as some form of self-defense. Who better knows how to defend themselves than the mother under "attack?" But, since you cannot accept the premise you have just made, you'll call it "stupid."

You cannot stand that anyone besides yourself might be better qualified to know when they need "self defense;" Because you are so much more "smart" than they are, right?

 

[AllieBaba]

Bullshit again. If a 10 year old girl is raped and becomes pregnant, of course the pregnancy is outside the bounds of normality, poses a significant threat to her life and physical well-being. There's a chance with such a young mother, the baby wouldn't be carried to term anyway.

Pro-lifers have never argued that people should be forced to have children if it threatens their lives. That's a pro abortion stance that has been attributed to us. And now you're trying to tell us that if we choose life, we must choose the infant over a raped child. That's pretty much the same as telling the pro abortionists that if they choose death, they must of course allow that unwanted children be killed as well.

No, we don't. And it is a stupid premise.