Backyard Renegade wrote:

Harry Krause wrote in message ...
John H wrote:
On 27 Dec 2003 20:29:45 -0800, (Backyard
Renegade) wrote:

Harry Krause wrote in message news:bsil4u$d51ji$1@ID-


Yeah, so, why are you coming down so hard on women under 18? You think
they're all incapable and stupid?

You keep spinning it as simply "under 18", let's get the cards on the
table, let's set a number, like 13. OK, you say a 13 yo girl should be
able to get this medical proceedure without her parents permission or
knowledge, how about field trips? Should the school have to tell me
when they are taking my 13 yo out of town? How about plastic surgery,
dating, cerfews, should she be able to get in a car with her friends
dad and take off to New York on a weekend without her parents
permission? I mean, Harry, where do you draw the line, what age do
parents lose all rights to help their kids make decisions? 18, 13,
10??? Or is is just this one decision, abortion you want to apply this
to as it suits your personal agenda of not wanting anyone to be
accountable for anything?

Good points. I'll be very surprised if you get anything more than
sarcasm or generalities from Harry, jps, et al.

John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!


There are too many instances of right-wing extremist parents forcing
their view of morality on minor girls, with devastating results. If a
13-year-old girl wants or needs an abortion, she should be able to get
one. If her parents want to help, fine. If not, tough darts: the courts
should immediately appoint someone to help the young lady.

The world doesn't need any more of the bigotry, hate and
small-mindedness spewed by right-wingers.

"Hello, Mrs. Gingrich? We have your 13-year-old daughter down here, and
she wants an abortion. Our doctor will perform it in 2 hours. Do you
want to come down here and provide her with support? YEs? Okay, be here
by 3 pm. If not, a friend of the court will help your daughter through
her time of need and the doctor will perform the surgery.

"And no, you cannot remove your pregnant daughter from the premises so
you can try to talk her out of this decision. This is her life, not yours."


How's that?


No good, you still will not answer any direct questions.


What are you babbling about? I gave you my answer on abortions for
13-year-old girls. My answer is the same for all women: abortion on
demand during the first trimester, parental notification for very young
girls, but no ability for parental interference in whether the gal gets
one or not.

Without writing a disseration on the rearing of female teens, let me say
that the household rules and regulations are best determined by direct
negotiations, with the parental units letting go bit by bit.

And, no, I don't believe a gal should be "held accountable" for not
using proper contraception by being forced to bear a child because her
lunatic right-wing parents want to teach her a lesson.

Got it?

ABORTION ON DEMAND FOR ALL FEMALES DURING THE FIRST TRIMESTER. ALL FEMALES.




--
Email sent to is never read.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Hey, we're not that far apart.

My answer is the same for all women: abortion on
demand during the first trimester,

Abortion on demand before the beating of the heart...about 6 weeks. (See?
We're only 6 weeks apart there Harry)

parental notification for very young
girls,

I agree...as long as you define "very young" in the same way as the law.
Those under 18 years old are minors...and the parents should be notified.

but no ability for parental interference in whether the gal gets
one or not.

Minors can't give informed consent. If the parents refuse to sign an
informed consent form, then the doctor shouldn't be able to perform the
procedure. Of course, in cases where the parents are unavailable or deemed
incompetent (and thus can't sign the form), then the courts should be able
to grant consent.




Without writing a disseration on the rearing of female teens, let me say
that the household rules and regulations are best determined by direct
negotiations, with the parental units letting go bit by bit.

Fine. But 13 years old is too early to "let go".



And, no, I don't believe a gal should be "held accountable" for not
using proper contraception by being forced to bear a child because her
lunatic right-wing parents want to teach her a lesson.

It's not to "teach her a lesson". It's to protect the life of the infant.
If the pregnancy is past the first trimester, you've already stated that you
oppose the right to an abortion. Are you "teaching the woman a lesson" by
denying her the ability to get an abortion in the 2nd or 3rd trimesters?

NOYB wrote:


It's not to "teach her a lesson". It's to protect the life of the infant.

Bull****.

If the pregnancy is past the first trimester, you've already stated that you
oppose the right to an abortion.


No, I didn't state that at all. This is why you (and you really are
brighter than most of the neoCons in here) conservatives get things
confused. You jump to conclusions from information not in play.

I am in favor of abortion on demand for all females during the first
trimester. After the first trimester, abortion should be available to
any female who requires one for any significant medical reason, and
significant includes the health of the mother or the fetus.




--
Email sent to is never read.

On 29 Dec 2003 05:41:07 -0800, (Backyard
Renegade) wrote:

Harry Krause wrote in message ...
Snipped
There are too many instances of right-wing extremist parents forcing
their view of morality on minor girls, with devastating results. If a
13-year-old girl wants or needs an abortion, she should be able to get
one. If her parents want to help, fine. If not, tough darts: the courts
should immediately appoint someone to help the young lady.

The world doesn't need any more of the bigotry, hate and
small-mindedness spewed by right-wingers.

"Hello, Mrs. Gingrich? We have your 13-year-old daughter down here, and
she wants an abortion. Our doctor will perform it in 2 hours. Do you
want to come down here and provide her with support? YEs? Okay, be here
by 3 pm. If not, a friend of the court will help your daughter through
her time of need and the doctor will perform the surgery.

"And no, you cannot remove your pregnant daughter from the premises so
you can try to talk her out of this decision. This is her life, not yours."


How's that?


No good, you still will not answer any direct questions.

Harry's preferred scenario would go like this:

"Hello, Harry, your 13 year-old daughter is down in the basement
giving head to my son. You want to come over and talk to her or
anything?"

"No man, I don't force my morality on my daughter. I'm afraid the
results would be devastating. I never have tried to imbue her with any
sense of morality, so no sense in starting now. Why don't you call a
friend of the court?"





John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

John H wrote:

On 29 Dec 2003 05:41:07 -0800, (Backyard
Renegade) wrote:

Harry Krause wrote in message ...
Snipped
There are too many instances of right-wing extremist parents forcing
their view of morality on minor girls, with devastating results. If a
13-year-old girl wants or needs an abortion, she should be able to get
one. If her parents want to help, fine. If not, tough darts: the courts
should immediately appoint someone to help the young lady.

The world doesn't need any more of the bigotry, hate and
small-mindedness spewed by right-wingers.

"Hello, Mrs. Gingrich? We have your 13-year-old daughter down here, and
she wants an abortion. Our doctor will perform it in 2 hours. Do you
want to come down here and provide her with support? YEs? Okay, be here
by 3 pm. If not, a friend of the court will help your daughter through
her time of need and the doctor will perform the surgery.

"And no, you cannot remove your pregnant daughter from the premises so
you can try to talk her out of this decision. This is her life, not yours."


How's that?


No good, you still will not answer any direct questions.

Harry's preferred scenario would go like this:


You had me fooled for a while, John. I thought you were brighter than
the average neoCon. You're not.

Once a 13-year-old girl is pregnant, it's a bit late to be forcing
right-wing "morality" issues on her, eh?

Some years ago, at one of the mindless right-wing fundie churches in
Jax, the pre-teens were forced to sign a pledge that they would abstain
from pre-marital sex. The pledge was reinforced with the usual anti-sex
obnoxiousness of the right wing.

Result? More pregnancies among the gals the next few years than ever in
the church's history.

The unanswered question? How many were the result of daddy messing with
his little gal. Incest is a big problem among you righties.








--
Email sent to is never read.

Harry's preferred scenario would go like this:

"Hello, Harry, your 13 year-old daughter is down in the basement
giving head to my son. You want to come over and talk to her or
anything?"

So, it would be up to Harry to control his daughter- but if your son can knock
off a little chunk here and there it's all winks, nods, and elbow nudges?

Get the heck off the phone and deal with your son. :-)

It's always amazing that people approach sex with such a double standard. If a
young man is sexually active at an early age, it's almost a badge of honor. A
young woman at the same age? Too often she's called a whore, a slut, or etc.

Can't have it both ways. Can't handle male sexuality with a wink and a nod,
(handing Jr a condom with the car keys), and throw a virginity belt on the
females..........unless of course one thinks the males should be porking each
other.......and I don't think most of the double standard folks actually
condone that, either.

Incest is a big problem among you righties.



Harry, that's ridiculous. You sound like Rush Limbaugh in reverse.

On 29 Dec 2003 15:41:37 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

Harry's preferred scenario would go like this:

"Hello, Harry, your 13 year-old daughter is down in the basement
giving head to my son. You want to come over and talk to her or
anything?"

So, it would be up to Harry to control his daughter- but if your son can knock
off a little chunk here and there it's all winks, nods, and elbow nudges?

Get the heck off the phone and deal with your son. :-)

It's always amazing that people approach sex with such a double standard. If a
young man is sexually active at an early age, it's almost a badge of honor. A
young woman at the same age? Too often she's called a whore, a slut, or etc.

Can't have it both ways. Can't handle male sexuality with a wink and a nod,
(handing Jr a condom with the car keys), and throw a virginity belt on the
females..........unless of course one thinks the males should be porking each
other.......and I don't think most of the double standard folks actually
condone that, either.


Aw Chuc, you missed the point. Someone had stated, "There are too many
instances of right-wing extremist parents forcing their view of
morality on minor girls, with devastating results."

Don't read any more into it than you have to.

John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:


It's not to "teach her a lesson". It's to protect the life of the
infant.

Bull****.


I can't speak for every pro-lifer, but protecting the life of the unborn is
why *I* feel abortion should be illegal past the first 6 weeks.



If the pregnancy is past the first trimester, you've already stated that
you
oppose the right to an abortion.


No, I didn't state that at all. This is why you (and you really are
brighter than most of the neoCons in here) conservatives get things
confused. You jump to conclusions from information not in play.

I am in favor of abortion on demand for all females during the first
trimester. After the first trimester, abortion should be available to
any female who requires one for any significant medical reason, and
significant includes the health of the mother or the fetus.

Fine. But what about the women who, in the absence of any underlying health
risk to her or the infant, insist upon having the right to an abortion at
*any* stage in the pregnancy? Is forcing her to have the baby after the
first trimester done "just to teach her a lesson"? Or is it to protect the
life of the baby?

Gould 0738 wrote:
Harry's preferred scenario would go like this:

"Hello, Harry, your 13 year-old daughter is down in the basement
giving head to my son. You want to come over and talk to her or
anything?"

So, it would be up to Harry to control his daughter- but if your son can knock
off a little chunk here and there it's all winks, nods, and elbow nudges?

Get the heck off the phone and deal with your son. :-)

Gotta wonder if his son practices safe sex...



--
Email sent to is never read.