That is to say a pregnancy aborted if the girl is under 16? If its law not to consent to sex under 16 then should it not follow that an abortion should occur in such circumstances?
2006-10-11 02:47:32 · 28 answers · asked by Anonymous in Pregnancy & Parenting ➔ Other - Pregnancy & Parenting
Why is the argument unsound or fallacious?
2006-10-11 02:51:27 · update #1
Why have a Law if its not enforced?
2006-10-11 02:52:28 · update #2
Abortion as Law would be a deterrent to stop the problem in the first place.
2006-10-11 02:53:48 · update #3
So am i right in saying that it is not illegal for a man to have sex with an underage gilr as long as she consents? Come on please!
2006-10-11 02:57:15 · update #4
OK so what is the Law as it stands for? Should it not say it is illegal to have sex under the age of 16 unless both parties are under the age of 16 in which case it is ok?
2006-10-11 03:00:29 · update #5
What a stupid thing to say. Solving one problem with another (murder by the way) is not the answer. How many young girls, having found out they are pregnant go and tell their parents straightaway? You would be aborting 5/6/7 month old fetus's.
I think mandatory classes for boys and girls highlighting pregnancy, how it can happen, what can be done to prevent it and what to do if it does happen is the answer. Also educating parents of teenage girls on how to talk to their child about the subject would help.
Maybe compulsary contraception is the answer? Who knows?
2006-10-11 03:05:56 · answer #1 · answered by Dingle-Dongle 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm pro-choice, don't get me wrong, but I think the disconnect is parents not reigning in their children, not the children themselves. If the parents can't control their children, then yes, the children are going to go out, screw around, and get into trouble. It's the parent that's the failure, not the child.
I do believe the choice should exist for these girls, but I don't think that the government has the right to decide that they MUST or MUST NOT do anything.
Abortion as law for minors under 16 - How is this a deterrant? Did Abortion just suddenly become mom and dad, teaching the daughter to keep her knees closed? No, it didn't. An abortion is a medical procedure. It is inanimate. It cannot teach. It simply is or is not.
Saying abortion is a deterrant is like saying if you give condoms to kids, they'll use them. It's simply false.
2006-10-11 09:51:03 · answer #2 · answered by sovereign_carrie 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You can go to Oregonlive.com and check out articles on abortion right now. The state allows minors abortions without parental consent and is in the process of changing the law to have the girl go through a court proceeding with a family judge. This would make it the judge's choice whether the girls need to contact their parents or not, when an abortion is desired.
I think it's purpose is to deal with the situation on a case by case basis, but what would happen if it took too much time to make the court date?
2006-10-11 13:38:01 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why kill an innccoent child? When their is so many loving couples out their that can not concieve that want to adopt?
In one way isnt it the parents fault for not keeping an eye on a hormone ranging teen?
Sometimes younger girls can be suduced and they never tell anyone because they feel they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. Do you realize how many people would be in jail if every single guy was turned in? How can something like that be inforced if the girl keeps the guy a secret?
There is no possible way of inforcing such a law, it just kinds of keeps things hidden.
2006-10-11 10:38:21 · answer #4 · answered by mellow_26241 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I would have to say to no way. If the government stopped paying for these teen-mums then I think the numbers of teen mums would fall.
I had my 1st child when I was 22 I was in my own home and had a full time job also with my hubby, as we had a mortgage to pay I had to go back to work full-time when he was just 6 weeks old.
So having a baby is NO excuse for not working, also if the girl is under 16 (still legally a child). She should be made to stay at home with her parents.
On that TV show last night about teen parents there were a couple who had 5or 6 children and both parents were NOT working so they were getting over £1500 per month in benefits. That's more then my hubby earns in a month and we have a mortgage to pay!!!!!!
2006-10-11 12:53:05 · answer #5 · answered by ***Missy*** 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No. That would fall under the heading of Cruel and Unusual Punishment. Don't want to sound like a raving pro-life lunatic, I'm not, but wouldn't that be akin to implementing the death penalty for breaking curfew?
Better idea? A legal requirement that the father be reported, if he's overage and she's under, prosecute him. If they're the same age or within legal bounds, fine them.
Anyone under the age of majority creating or producing a child should be mandated to attend parenting classes. Failure to do so should automatically cause that baby to be removed from the parents' custody, placed in foster care and adopted out to a better prepared family.
Used to be a time when a child born out of wedlock was labeled for life, documented on the birth certificate as a bastard.
2006-10-11 10:05:57 · answer #6 · answered by auld mom 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
This one is kind of hard, but abortion to some people is murder. Some girls at age 16 really look 22 or older, but the law is the law, if they should get pregnant, then I think that both parties should be helld responsible, but abortion is definetely not the way to go..>D
2006-10-11 09:52:34 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. It should be allowed (as in fact is), but NOT mandatory by law. At the time of our grand-mothers, women were getting married and having children (legally!!!) as young as 14 (in my Country, Italy, this was legal until 1975!). Why should we be so extreme now? Maybe it would be better to invest in helping girls avoiding early pregnancies (mandatory health and sex education, for example) but once the baby is on it's way, we should rather try to help him/her having a normal life, regardless the age of the mum, instead of finding a "legal" way to eliminate him.
2006-10-13 09:06:39 · answer #8 · answered by Grilla Parlante 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
no u cant force someone to kill their own child because thats basicly what abrotion is killing ur baby and i think its a disgrace that in this day and age people are even considering forcing a young person do that abortion can still go wrong and cause the woman to be infertile and there are such things as adoption, there are plenty of people out there who cant have children but would love them and make such good parents
2006-10-11 11:55:10 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
i agree about the under age sex law however i do not agree with making a young girl have an abortion u cant force some1 into something that big iys unfair she could be a very good mum just cause she is young it shouldnt make a difference
2006-10-11 09:59:53 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋