In October 2001, Democrat Senator Walter Campbell issued the Scarlet Letter Law...A law that stated that all Florida women that were wanting to put their child up for adoption would have to publically state their names, age , race, sex, and all their sexual partners in the newpaper...the add would run once a week for four weeks straight...this was was only effective for 18 months..However, is trying to become reeenacted again...
This law would alos apply to all rape victims as well...
Do u believe that it would possibly increase the number of abortions performed?
Does it violate the privacy issue??
Whats next from the Govermant are they going to have everyone that is HIV positive publically state their names too with all their sexual partners...
This could be done in a better way without humiliating the woman d u agree?
2006-11-06 04:23:24 · 7 answers · asked by coopchic 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
First of all, they are making the women who give their babies up sound like criminals. I mean, when you file bankruptcy the blurb in the paper is only in for one day. I, for one, admire women that give up their babies for adoption. They have the brains & heart to know they can not take care of the baby and they choose to carry to term instead of get an abortion. It will definitely raise the amount of abortions. It's crazy.
2006-11-06 04:27:27 · answer #1 · answered by momofmodi 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The law was repealed in May of 2003 by governor Jeb Bush and was replaced by 'father registry'. Here is an article I found:
Florida's internationally infamous "Scarlet Letter" law was finally repealed on May 31.
The bill, passed into law in October 2001, required women who wanted to put a child up for adoption but couldn't find the child's father to run ads in newspapers describing themselves and their sexual histories.
The law, penned by State Sen. Walter G. Campbell Jr.--a Democrat--required women who'd had sex outside of marriage to pay out of pocket to place ads that listed their name, age, height, weight, hair and eye color and nationality. They had to be run in every city or county where the child could have been conceived.
In addition, the women were obligated to give descriptions of any men they'd had sex with that could have resulted in the pregnancy, and the time, date and location that sexual intercourse took place.
No exceptions were made for rape or incest survivors or for underage girls.
Politicians who passed the law claimed to be concerned about paternity suits in adoption cases.
Gov. Jeb Bush signed a bill rescinding the state law. However, the governor and the legislature only moved to erase the law from the books after a South Florida rape victim went to court to challenge it. That legal battle resulted in two state courts ruling the law unconstitutional.
But now, Gator state political patriarchs in both houses have voted unanimously to establish a "Scarlet Registry" to replace the old law. This database, which will be kept by the state Department of Health's Office of Vital Statistics, allows men who believe they may be the father to list the name, address and physical description of a woman they had sex with, along with the date and place where conception took place.
Some 30 states have these "father registries."
I think these father registries are a good idea. I agree that the repealed bill was wack so good thing they changed it. The political party titles in this case really surprise me...but I am pleased by Jeb Bush in this case.
2006-11-06 12:54:47 · answer #2 · answered by Teresa C 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well first, I am pro choice when it comes to rape victims. If you willingly had sex and got pregnant, then yes, you should take responsibility and have the baby and put it up for adoption, but if you were raped, no, you should have the choice.
As for that law, I do believe that a mothers information should be provided to the adopter of the child, so that they know what background the child is coming from. But to provide that as public information? Its no one elses business.
I would like to see one day that when a baby is adopted the mothers information is given to the parents that adopt the child, so that when the child is of age (or even sooner) it is easier for them to find thier birth parents. Also mothers who choose to give up thier child should be able to get pictures once a year so that they know what they child has become of, and even see them a few times a year and be allowed to spend time with thier child.
Just because they couldnt take care of thier child does not mean that they do not love him or her.
2006-11-06 12:28:44 · answer #3 · answered by m_thurson 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I absolutely agree with you. There is no reason that a mother needs to be publicly humiliated for taking the higher road and adopting out a child they know they can't raise. I think it is pretty sad that some people would like to find a way to punish them.
2006-11-06 12:29:57 · answer #4 · answered by Nicki 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
What a disgusting law! What could possibly be the point of enacting such legislation? "Shaming" women into keeping their babies or forcing them to have an abortion to avoid the humiliation? This makes me sick and if it becomes a permanent law I certainly won't be moving to Florida - EVER.
2006-11-06 13:21:10 · answer #5 · answered by wyvern1313 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Thats what you get when people vote for God-hating communists.
2006-11-06 12:30:11 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
thats pretty sick. where is the compassion, hate the sin not the sinner
2006-11-06 12:27:10 · answer #7 · answered by Robert K 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋