10-year-old girl denied abortion in Ohio

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  thrawn-31  •  one month ago  •  115 comments

10-year-old girl denied abortion in Ohio
10-year-old girl was denied an abortion in Ohio after the Supreme Court ruled last week that it was overturning Roe v. Wade, demonstrating the tangible impacts that the high court’s decision is having on patients seeking access to the medical procedure.

Here we go! You all ready for this total clusterfuck?!


S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



 A child abuse doctor in Ohio contacted Dr. Caitlin Bernard,  an obstetrician-gynecologist in Indiana, after receiving a 10-year-old patient who was six weeks and three days pregnant,  the Indianapolis Star reported


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
1  seeder  Thrawn 31    one month ago

The girl in the pic isn't who this article is about! Just had to have a picture of something and that was the first one that popped up. 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
1.1  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Thrawn 31 @1    one month ago

Rather than post a totally irrelevant picture, I would suggest that you seek out a photo from a different article on the same subject in order to use it as the required image for posting and indicate that it was necessary to do so, and failing that, just state that no photo was available and use your own avatar. 

This article points out the ability for States to pass extreme cruelty laws - this was a situation where a 10 year old girl - not even close to reaching the age of consent was implied to have been "abused" (reference to the "abuse doctor" referring her) - why such sweet words? - she was RAPED, a CHILD RAPED, and as a mere child being forced by the government of her State to bear and give birth to a child, which would most likely totally ruin her life, and yet I've been criticized on this site for suggesting that the next step for the SCOTUS would be to bring back The Inquisition.  

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
2  seeder  Thrawn 31    one month ago

A pregnant 10 year old, I wonder who could be at fault?! 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1  Texan1211  replied to  Thrawn 31 @2    one month ago
I wonder who could be at fault?! 

Just offhand, I would surmise some pedophile is at fault.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
2.1.1  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1    one month ago

My bet is the dad or uncle.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
2.1.2  JBB  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1    one month ago

The gop in Ohio is responsible for this law!

So, yes, a paedophile got her pregnant but it is the damn gop in Ohio keeping her pregnant...

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.3  Texan1211  replied to  JBB @2.1.2    one month ago

Is the GOP preventing her from going elsewhere?

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
2.1.4  JBB  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.3    one month ago

We are talking about a ten year old girl FFS!

She should not have to travel for healthcare.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
2.1.5  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.3    one month ago

You gonna pay for it? You being all pro life and shit, how about paying for a procedure that may save a little girl's life? Or do you not care about little girl's lives?

You see the retarded hole you have dug for yourself? God pro-lifers are fucking idiots.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.6  Texan1211  replied to  Thrawn 31 @2.1.5    one month ago

Nope, I won't be paying for it any more than you will.

Instead of assuming shit you don't have a fucking clue about, why not ASK what my position on abortion is?

That way your posts won't appear foolish.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.7  Texan1211  replied to  Thrawn 31 @2.1.5    one month ago

Are you anti-life??

 
 
 
Hallux
Sophomore Principal
2.1.8  Hallux  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.3    one month ago
Is the GOP preventing her from going elsewhere?

Would you use the same argument if you had to go out of state to buy bullets?

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
2.1.9  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.6    one month ago

You are right and I am sorry.

We have been at odds for so long that I can honestly say I have stopped "reading" your posts and only "read" what I am already looking for. 

You have posted so many dumb things, and I have done the same, that I feel like we feel we cannot see eye to eye and are just out to slit each other's throats, but I think that is wrong and I don't want that. I want to start anew.

I am sorry Texan1211, I am sorry. This is my public apology and the only one anyone will ever see. 

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
2.1.10  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  JBB @2.1.2    one month ago

It’s a short article but apparently too much for some to read.

The child abuse doctor an obstetrician-gynecologist in Indiana, the Indianapolis Star reported this.  She is getting an abortion in Indiana.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
2.1.11  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.6    one month ago

...based on my post below, i am going to let this go. this one.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
2.1.12  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  Thrawn 31 @2.1.11    one month ago

What post? And are you seriously going to use my apology as an excuse to be a douche?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.13  Texan1211  replied to  Hallux @2.1.8    one month ago
Would you use the same argument if you had to go out of state to buy bullets?

Please refrain from asking me silly questions.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.14  Texan1211  replied to  Thrawn 31 @2.1.9    one month ago

Apology accepted.

My stance on abortion is and has been:

A woman should be able to have all the abortions she wants and can afford.

I also think abortion is a piss-poor birth control method considering the plethora of options available to prevent pregnancies readily available to men and women in today's world.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
2.1.15  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.14    one month ago

Agreed on all counts. 

 
 
 
Hallux
Sophomore Principal
2.1.16  Hallux  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.13    one month ago

Thank you for the silly answer!

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.17  Texan1211  replied to  Hallux @2.1.16    one month ago

You should expect it based on your question.

 
 
 
SteevieGee
Senior Silent
2.1.19  SteevieGee  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.3    one month ago
Is the GOP preventing her from going elsewhere?

If they get their way she'd have to go to Canada and then still get prosecuted.  She's about 10 years too old for them to care about.

 
 
 
magicschoolbusdropout
Freshman Expert
2.1.20  magicschoolbusdropout  replied to  SteevieGee @2.1.19    one month ago
If they get their way

Normal parents would MAKE SURE their 10 year old didn't get that way.

A 10 year old needing an abortion, isn't an abortion rulings fault.

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Freshman Quiet
2.1.21  afrayedknot  replied to  magicschoolbusdropout @2.1.20    one month ago

“A 10 year old needing an abortion, isn't an abortion rulings fault.”

A 10 year old required to carry to term is an anti-choice rulings outcome.

No winners here, only one example of the inevitable, innumerable unintended consequences when rights are inexplicably reversed. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.22  Tessylo  replied to  JBB @2.1.4    one month ago

FFS was my thought exactly

jrSmiley_98_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.23  Tessylo  replied to  Thrawn 31 @2.1.5    one month ago

jrSmiley_93_smiley_image.jpg

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
2.1.24  Sean Treacy  replied to  SteevieGee @2.1.19    one month ago
they get their way she'd have to go to Canada and then still get prosecuted.  She's about 10 years too old for them to care about.

Can imaginary people be prosecuted? 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.25  Tessylo  replied to  magicschoolbusdropout @2.1.20    one month ago

It might have been the father FFS or a close relative or her pastor even

jrSmiley_78_smiley_image.gif

JFC the stupid shit some people say in defense of the alleged conservatives/gop and the SC for removing OUR rights

 
 
 
magicschoolbusdropout
Freshman Expert
2.1.26  magicschoolbusdropout  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.22    one month ago
FFS was my thought exactly

Really ?

 
 
 
magicschoolbusdropout
Freshman Expert
2.1.27  magicschoolbusdropout  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.25    one month ago

[removed]

 
 
 
magicschoolbusdropout
Freshman Expert
2.1.28  magicschoolbusdropout  replied to  afrayedknot @2.1.21    one month ago
A 10 year old required to carry to term is exactly an anti-choice rulings outcome.

Anti-Parenting protection of a 10 year old would have been a "Choice".

Since she did get pregnant that is.

Isn't "Choice" great ?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.29  Tessylo  replied to  afrayedknot @2.1.21    one month ago

Unintended consequences?

This is exactly what all those faux small c christians and 'compassionate conservatives' and whack job evangelicals have been working towards for decades

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Freshman Quiet
2.1.30  afrayedknot  replied to  magicschoolbusdropout @2.1.28    one month ago

“Anti-Parenting protection…”

Working for de santis?

 
 
 
magicschoolbusdropout
Freshman Expert
2.1.31  magicschoolbusdropout  replied to  afrayedknot @2.1.30    one month ago
Working for de santis?

What is working for DeSantis ?

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Freshman Quiet
2.1.32  afrayedknot  replied to  magicschoolbusdropout @2.1.31    one month ago

“What is working for DeSantis ?”

What is ‘Anti-Parenting protection”?

 
 
 
magicschoolbusdropout
Freshman Expert
2.1.33  magicschoolbusdropout  replied to  afrayedknot @2.1.32    one month ago
What is ‘Anti-Parenting protection”?

Parents that Don't....... Parent.

It wasn't hard to understand.

Soooooo...... Again ......... What about DeSantis is working for him ?

 
 
 
SteevieGee
Senior Silent
2.1.34  SteevieGee  replied to  magicschoolbusdropout @2.1.20    one month ago
Normal parents would MAKE SURE their 10 year old didn't get that way

She didn't get to choose her parents.  Neither did I.  Did you?

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
2.2  Ronin2  replied to  Thrawn 31 @2    one month ago

Considering it is a child abuse case- it could be the father; some other relative; or friend of the family. It is usually someone close to the child involved.

Whoever it is needs to be punished to the fullest extent of the law; the sick fuck.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
2.2.1  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  Ronin2 @2.2    one month ago

So your comment was all about the perp, what about her? You know, the 10 year old girl? 

Being pro life and all I would think you would be a little concerned with them....

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
2.2.2  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  Ronin2 @2.2    one month ago

So again, what about the 10 year old? The ACTUAL victim?

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
2.3  Tacos!  replied to  Thrawn 31 @2    one month ago

She was probably asking for it.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
2.3.1  Ronin2  replied to  Tacos! @2.3    one month ago

You really do need to put an /S behind that comment. 

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
2.3.2  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  Tacos! @2.3    one month ago

Lol i bet right? being all 10 years old and shit. Having the fucking audacity to ovulate, and you know, be sexually female (take that trans shit somewhere else). 

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Sophomore Guide
2.3.3  Right Down the Center  replied to  Thrawn 31 @2.3.2    one month ago

[DELETED]

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
2.3.4  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  Right Down the Center @2.3.3    one month ago

No sarcasm?

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Sophomore Guide
2.3.5  Right Down the Center  replied to  Thrawn 31 @2.3.4    one month ago

Yes. But also sound advise. 

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
2.3.6  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  Right Down the Center @2.3.5    one month ago

true

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
2.3.7  Tacos!  replied to  Ronin2 @2.3.1    one month ago

Do I though? I really hope not.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
2.3.8  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  Tacos! @2.3.7    one month ago

Ronin was hoping you were serious.

 
 
 
SteevieGee
Senior Silent
2.3.9  SteevieGee  replied to  Tacos! @2.3    one month ago

She was probably asking for it.

 

Her abusive step father dressed her in way too sexy clothing and he couldn't control himself because of it.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.3.10  Tessylo  replied to  SteevieGee @2.3.9    one month ago

She seduced him

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3  CB     one month ago

What?! Oh my. Uh-uh.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
3.1  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  CB @3    one month ago

In Ohio, YUP! 10 year old mothers are a thing.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3.1.1  CB   replied to  Thrawn 31 @3.1    one month ago

And what becomes of the therapy she is going to need being that she will be a member of a rare club of young mothers?

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
3.1.2  Sean Treacy  replied to  CB @3.1.1    one month ago

Yeah, being raped at 10 isn’t that traumatic. Imagine the therapy she’d have to undergo after giving a baby up for adoption. Horrifying .

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3.1.3  CB   replied to  Sean Treacy @3.1.2    one month ago

Don't be flip with me, "man." She will have to carry and give birth all while 'holding' down a school term. How many of your children underwent that?

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
3.1.4  JBB  replied to  Sean Treacy @3.1.2    one month ago

Do you realize how horrifying your forced birth mindset is? Who thinks that it is okay for a ten year old child to be forced to carry and to deliver her rapist's spawn? I do not get it...

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
3.1.5  Sean Treacy  replied to  CB @3.1.3    one month ago

Sure.  Going to school would have scarred her for life.  Not the rape. . The abortion cured all her trauma 

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Freshman Quiet
3.1.6  afrayedknot  replied to  Sean Treacy @3.1.2    one month ago

“Horrifying .”

Sarcasm is one thing. This dipshitery is beyond the pale. Horrifying, indeed. 

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
3.1.7  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  CB @3.1.3    one month ago
She will have to carry and give birth all while 'holding' down a school term. How many of your children underwent that?

back when i was in high school in the late 70s and into the mid 80s(  when my ex wife graduated ) , i know of at least a good dozen HS aged girls that did  just that. and that was just my high school , with an averge annual graduating class of maybe 40 kids . and there was always 2 or 3 per class.

 i will grant that these people were a good 5-8 years older than this girl in the article , but they did have the choice to keep and carry to term , keep or give up the baby . many of them eventually married the baby daddies too, and some went on to be single moms by choice .

now before anyone jumps to conclusions about what I think , no one has really asked me where i stand on the issue , so before someone attacks , maybe they should ask .

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
3.1.8  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  Sean Treacy @3.1.2    one month ago
Yeah, being raped at 10 isn’t that traumatic.

Dude... Why even say that as a joke?

Shit not even I did that.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3.1.9  CB   replied to  Sean Treacy @3.1.5    one month ago

I asked you how many? I will assume none since you ignored the question. So don't presume to know the trauma of childbirth at ten, because there will be trauma (and school-life) to deal with.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3.1.10  CB   replied to  Mark in Wyoming @3.1.7    one month ago

Where do you stand on this issue and please be thorough (for our benefit). :)

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3.1.11  CB   replied to  Thrawn 31 @3.1.8    one month ago

Trauma began with male insertion, which is a step beyond in the scheme of this whole 'happening.'

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
3.1.12  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  CB @3.1.10    one month ago

well, I Think that the extremes of both the pro life and pro choice sides took over the issue a long time ago. personally i am in the middle . but i am also only 11 years older than the Roe ruling , so i have lived with it pretty much my entire reproductive life and had it pretty much said to my face that a man has no say in the choice even IF married to the woman choosing to do so . i solved that issue by having my tubes tied at 32, she didnt want any more kids , it was cheaper for me to have it done ,and it was an in and out proceedure where she would have had to have had invasive surgery and spend the night in the hosp , if everything went well. , and the kicker was , i had to get my then wifes permission and consent to do so, she could have had anything done she wanted without my consent  . ironic huh?

 If it were left to me to decide , i would say no bans would be put in place before X number of weeks gestation , and no abortions preformed after X weeks of gestation 

 the no bans before because sometimes it takes time to actually find out someone is pregnant 

 the no abortions part because usually a person getting one can say usually within a month if thats what they will do , so that leaves an ample window .

 I put x because those things can be negotiated to gain a majority .

 The caveate i would add , is that no bans shall apply in the cases of rape , incest , or if the mothers health is detrimentally affected to the point she would lose her own life carrying to term . or if it has been reasonable determined the fetus had a problem with development or deformity that it would not likely survive . call that one medically advised nessesity  no matter what point of gestation it happens to be .

I think ronin made some good points about how roe was overturned and how that could have been avoided over the almost 40 years it was in effect .

 I also think that the high court , decided to take away a political football and litmus test for any future member of the judiciary, especially the high court , nominated for an elevated position , meaning , they took the ball away and tossed it back into the states different fields .

This does not preclude the federal entity from coming up with something either , thing is the feds will have to come up with something a true majority would support as i have attempted to do above .

 point is , the extremes of the issue have been in control for far too long and those that are the real majority need to step up , and neither extreme will be happy , especially with what i propose .

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
3.1.13  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  CB @3.1.11    one month ago

Hey man, don't try to make me the bad guy here. I have 2 young daughters and live in a sadly conservative state. If anything is off with them we are taking a vacation out of state, I am not going to allow cocksuckers like Clerence Thomas to ruin my girls lives. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3.1.14  CB   replied to  Thrawn 31 @3.1.13    one month ago

My statement enhances your own. Read it again, please, and see if it is not so. :)  Up to now, I agree with everything you have discussed. Including making departures from the state if essential to/for your daughters liberties and choices. Why should a girl or woman be required to have children? Choice is optional.  An abortion ban is a state or federal mandate. .

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3.1.15  CB   replied to  Mark in Wyoming @3.1.12    one month ago

First, there are a great many "ironies" in the matter of human life and copulation. Too many to go on about here and now. :)

Second, if it was left up to me I would say the same about x number of weeks of gestation. And yes, extremities collectively suck.

Third, liberals have a thing about privacy and trusted that stare decisis meant something poignant to honorable justices. Now we learn that our "Justices" are merely men and women draped in symbolic robes who have dispelled the quaint notion many carry that there hearts (and opinions) are for the people and not for a chosen "party."

Fourth, the question of abortion was always meant for the states to decide constitutionally. But, politicians corrupt Justice. So in or out of turn, the "question" moved over to the courts and then it became a matter of uniformity under the law.

Fifth, in my opinion, abortion or sexual intercourse should not be an issue of politics (about likes and dislikes). We are talking about individuals here and sadly it is clear republicans/conservatives are all for individual liberties and freedoms until they are not. Then they are in lockstep to handicap liberals.

Yes, thank you for your insights.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
3.1.16  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  CB @3.1.15    one month ago

So can i take it  there is no objection to my line of thought ?

if stare decisis , were absolute , we would still have very many things that would adversely affect many people , seperate but equal , dredd scott , would be examples of "other " overturned rulings of the high court  .

 what many fail to understand , is there is no such thing as "settled law "  that only exists until a case falls between the cracks and the law does not provide for that particular case .

 And in such cases it IS the courts duty to re examine such "settled law " and it is their perogative to do what they feel must be done to get the issue resolved , in this case , the issue was returned to the states to decide for each jurisdiction as they see fit , until the federal entities of the legislative and executive come up with something that can be applied equally to all states . in other words , do their F'n jobs like should have been done 39 years ago and ample oppertunities to do so have presented themselves . and not make a political football out of the issue to bludgeon one side or the other .

 I dont know about others , but what i proposed is what i have already talked to my state reps about and will be trying on my part to advance to become state law .

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3.1.17  CB   replied to  Mark in Wyoming @3.1.16    one month ago

Yes. No proper objection to x periods of gestation and termination of pregnancies based of certain extenuating factors and acts.

State law would be relatively better and according to the (nearby) aspirations dear to the heart of this republic. However, people are not responsive to each others need. There seems to be a 'critter' of domination deep in the hearts of those players who want to dominate. And, so it goes.

Stare decisis (aka: settled law) is opinion that has been put through its 'rigors' and still stands based on many testings. Unfortunately, we are seeing that in the clutches of shall we say men and women of questionable interests lying in wait-a court can judge anything it wishes. BTW, this will be the case if states and congress does not follow up on its stewardship to listen to the people it serves.

Furthermore, there will always (it seems) be this divergence whereas what the/a majority wants is opposed to what is correct, decent, and most important, civil to the citizenry.

Alas! Now we see it. Woe are we to fight all our lives for the 'gaps' and openings between law and opinion.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
3.1.18  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  CB @3.1.17    one month ago
Alas! Now we see it. Woe are we to fight all our lives for the 'gaps' and openings between law and opinion.

Something i have come to realize AND accept , what was once acceptable to a prior generation/s , usually becomes totally unacceptable to one that follows sometime in the future , and that future generation also has the right to tear assunder whatever concept a prior generation deemed worthy .

So whatever is decided today , is likely at some point in the future be it near or far , be set aside as not applicable to those that are alive at that time. one can fight it all one wants , it wont change the outcome .

 where did i get that? off the top of my head from life lessons .

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
3.1.19  CB   replied to  Mark in Wyoming @3.1.18    one month ago

And yet our nation has no great or essential need for baby "excesses" since some/plenty adults here complain about the lifes/tyles and quality of life/lives they will support now! So dis-invested are some "Americans" in their fellow citizens they are willing to secede whether than diversify and open their minds to "gems" of possibilities. (That is, there are Americans in our country who can not stand to live free if others enjoy the freedoms they choose for themselves.)

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
4  Ronin2    one month ago

Sorry, if you are asking the redundant question of who is at fault that the girl couldn't get an abortion in Ohio; then blame the previous and current state legislatures and governors. They had ample opportunities to change the state laws regarding abortion since Roe vs Wade; and chose not to do so. You can also blame the Democrats that pre Reagan held bullet proof majorities in the House, Senate, and the Presidency and could have codified Roe into law at any time. Hell, the Democrats could have done it in the first few months of Obama's first term; and there is nothing Republicans could do about it.  Instead they chose to play politics and use abortion as a threat to keep themselves in power. They lose the presidency and Republicans get a conservative court and Roe is gone.

They should have realized that the pendulum in the Supreme Court swings both ways; the same way it does in politics. They thought that they were going to have a liberal court that would uphold Roe forever. Critical thinking is not the strong suit of politicians at any level of government.  

Abortion is now up to the states. Some will have no abortion; some will have greatly restricted abortion; and some will go completely bat shit crazy like California and have abortion up until the birth due date.

I don't care if leftists hate this current Supreme Court. They have made rulings both for and against conservative positions. Think Republicans are thrilled Title 42 and Stay in Mexico were just ended by the Supreme Court? Time for Congress at the federal and state levels to get off their asses and do their damn jobs for a change if they want to fix things. If not then it is up to voters to elect candidates that will get things done!

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
4.1  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  Ronin2 @4    one month ago

So you are okay with a 10 year old being forced to give birth? 

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
5  seeder  Thrawn 31    one month ago

At least I am honest enough to say that some "lives", depending on how you want to define life, matter much more than others. 

 
 
 
MisterT
Freshman Silent
6  MisterT    one month ago

Aborting a 10 year old? I'm prochoice but that is a little late term for me.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
6.1  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  MisterT @6    one month ago

Lol no, 10 year old not being able to get an abortion. 

Cuz we all know 11 year olds are such awesome parents. 

 
 
 
MisterT
Freshman Silent
6.1.1  MisterT  replied to  Thrawn 31 @6.1    one month ago

It's totally normal, I mean Isabella of Valois was married to Richard II in 1396 at the age of 10. 

I would think a 10 year old's body not developed enough for a normal birth. The perp should be castrated and forced to choke on his/her junk. (I'm politically correct, we can't assume the perp was a man since women have penises too)

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
6.1.2  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  MisterT @6.1.1    one month ago

Again, more punishment for the perp, but what about her? She is still pregnant because of a rape. What do we do for her?

 
 
 
MisterT
Freshman Silent
6.1.3  MisterT  replied to  Thrawn 31 @6.1.2    one month ago

Of course she needs an abortion and therapy, lots of it.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
6.1.4  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  MisterT @6.1.3    one month ago

I am asking the pro lifers.

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Sophomore Guide
6.1.5  Right Down the Center  replied to  Thrawn 31 @6.1.4    one month ago

You might find many pro lifers make an exception for rape and incest. Also life of the mother.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
6.1.6  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  Right Down the Center @6.1.5    one month ago

They need to reflect that view in laws then. 

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Sophomore Guide
6.1.7  Right Down the Center  replied to  Thrawn 31 @6.1.6    one month ago

Each state will have to do that based on their views, who they elect and how much this in particular issue affects their vote.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
6.1.8  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  Right Down the Center @6.1.7    one month ago
Each state will have to do that based on their views

And that is why this will be a clusterfuck. 

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Sophomore Guide
6.1.9  Right Down the Center  replied to  Thrawn 31 @6.1.8    one month ago
And that is why this will be a clusterfuck. 

Yet states governing themselves on issues not specific to the constitution is the way the country was set up.  They never said it could not be messy at times.  A central government making all the decisions brings different problems with it.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
6.1.10  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  Right Down the Center @6.1.9    one month ago

Yeah the last time we actually fought over human rights a lot of people died, probably should avoid that again. And as much as a central policy may suck, a patchwork can be just as bad. 

Pretty sure our founders never envisioned a country/;government so set in the ways of 1790 that it couldn't change and adapt.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
6.1.11  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  Right Down the Center @6.1.9    one month ago

 They never said it could not be messy at times. 

I dont think they thought it would "be detus" messy.

No? well I thought it was funny. 

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Sophomore Guide
6.1.12  Right Down the Center  replied to  Thrawn 31 @6.1.11    one month ago

jrSmiley_91_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
MisterT
Freshman Silent
7  MisterT    one month ago

I expect law to be passed so the abortions continue in the ghettos. It won't be long and Republicans will realize they have to support it because like the Democrats they don't want black babies either.

This is temporary.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
7.1  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  MisterT @7    one month ago

Lol damn! Just goin right at the racist angle for everyone lol. Props for the balls, or lady balls, or whatever in the fuck they are now, to do it lol. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.2  Tessylo  replied to  MisterT @7    one month ago

WTF

You're blaming Democrats/Progressives for what the conservatives/gop SC have thrust on us?

That's quite the dog whistle there

 
 
 
magicschoolbusdropout
Freshman Expert
7.2.1  magicschoolbusdropout  replied to  Tessylo @7.2    one month ago
That's quite the dog whistle there

[Deleted]

 
 
 
magicschoolbusdropout
Freshman Expert
7.2.2  magicschoolbusdropout  replied to  magicschoolbusdropout @7.2.1    one month ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
8  Kavika     one month ago

Sad commentary that a 10 year old could not get an abortion in her home state.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
8.1  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  Kavika @8    one month ago

Lol America baby! Shoot a kid in the head, eye roll, the idea of terminating a cluster of cells... "SCOTUS saves us!" 

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
8.1.1  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Thrawn 31 @8.1    one month ago

What are you trying to say?

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
8.1.2  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @8.1.1    one month ago

Our priorities are as fucked up as possible :)

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
8.1.3  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  Thrawn 31 @8.1    one month ago

Honestly if these mass shooting assholes REALLY wanted to make a statement they would be better off at bible camps

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
9  seeder  Thrawn 31    one month ago

And... Big shock to everyone, she was raped.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
10  seeder  Thrawn 31    one month ago

I am honestly disappointed to not see the anti-abortion crowd on this seed.  You would think they would be here celebrating the forced birth of a 10 year old rape victim. 

This is EXACTLY what they wanted.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
10.1  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Thrawn 31 @10    one month ago

Just remember , just because someone is pro choice, doesnt mean they are pro abortion , there are many subtle shades in between , about as many shades as there are individuals .

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
10.1.1  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @10.1    one month ago

I completely get that, and my entire position is... it is none of my fucking business. 

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
10.1.2  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Thrawn 31 @10.1.1    one month ago

i use to think that way after i got married , until i realized i had no say at all and it was completely out of my hands , then i had daughters , and when one came to me to tell me she was pregnant at a young age , i had the wisdom to ask her what she wanted to do , she told me i was going to be a grandpa . she could have done whatever she wanted . 

 so its none of your business , until its affecting someone you care about , one way or another.

keep in mind i am the product of choice , In 1961 , my mom was in the army , and found out she was pregnant with me , she was ORDERED by the military to have a proceedure that was in effect an abortion , she went AWOL, until the proceedure couldnt be done, she took a dishonorable discharge for failure to obey , ( which was later changed ) because SHE didnt want an abortion . I was born 2 weeks after her discharge .

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
10.1.3  seeder  Thrawn 31  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @10.1.2    one month ago

Mark, we are 100% on the same page here. I have two young daughters, and of course I want the world for them, and if they were older I would ask what they think and want to do. Right now there is no question, they will not be having kids while they are teenagers and whoever tries is going to be dead. 

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
10.1.4  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Thrawn 31 @10.1.3    one month ago

2 daughters , 3 grand daughters 

 my daughter was 17 , just turning 18( i laugh now remembering telling her she couldnt start dating until she turned 30) when she told me i was to be a grandpa for the first time , she has since given me 4 more grandkids , she FINALLY followed my  route and got her tubes tied after the last one was born on the 10th of last month .

 personally i dont believe in abortion , except for the instances i mentioned , rape , incest or health of mom, but i also can understand there will be cases that are actually not for me to say ., hense what i came up with above ,that to me is acceptable . it took me along time to get to that point though , and alot of different influences (life lessons ).

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
11  Sean Treacy    one month ago

Amazingly, It appears no one was arrested for raping a 10 year old in Ohio during this time frame. 

What are the odds?   Strange how there's nothing to back this up but the word of a political activist  abortionist.

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Quiet
12  charger 383    one month ago

The results of forced birth in this case would probably result in dead or badly injured 10 year old and fetus.  And lots of medicial costs, who pays the bills?

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Principal
12.1  sandy-2021492  replied to  charger 383 @12    one month ago

Not to mention the emotional damage.  How must it feel to know that you're being punished with a dangerous and painful experience for somebody else's crime?  I can't imagine she would ever see the world in a positive light again.  Survivors of sexual abuse have enough trouble recovering.  There is no reason for the state to make it even harder for them.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
12.2  Sean Treacy  replied to  charger 383 @12    one month ago

Birthing costs for imaginary babies are astonishingly cheap.

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Quiet
12.2.1  charger 383  replied to  Sean Treacy @12.2    one month ago

If this was an imaginary baby there would not be a problem and it probably would not be in the news 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
12.2.2  Sean Treacy  replied to  charger 383 @12.2.1    one month ago

Or maybe an abortionist called a friendly newspaper who did no investigating and simply ran with the story because it perfectly fit the narrative they were pushing.  

No police reports have been filed alleging a rape of a 10 year old in Ohio around May 6th, despite a legal duty to report it. The formerly publicity happy abortionist is now refusing to answer any questions once people became suspicious of her story, even ducking questions from friendly outlets like Snopes. 

But sure. People win the lottery. Maybe the incredibly rare event of a 10 year old getting pregnant happened o exactly six weeks to the  before the Dobbs decision occurred and the six week abortion ban went into effect  And maybe the" child abuse doctor" violated his or her legal duty to report the rape of a ten year old and although while willing illegally   protect a rapist, wouldn't lie to the Ohio  abortionist that the soon to be aborted baby was 72 hours younger than it was and instead sought out a publicity hungry abortionist certain to make it all public.  

 
 
 
Waykwabu
Freshman Quiet
13  Waykwabu    one month ago

Speaking from a country outside the US,

Have read all the comments above.

It just amazes me completely that such a situation could even exist.  I sort of don't even believe what I'm reading.   It's not a joke is it ??

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
13.1  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Waykwabu @13    one month ago
"Speaking from a country outside the US,"

LOL. Join the club - it's a VERY small one. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
14  Sean Treacy    4 weeks ago

A hoax to drive the narrative...

Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost just said that his office has no evidence of a raped ten-year-old child who was impregnated, including a request for lab results. He also noted that Ohio law would have allowed for an abortion in such a case.

https://twitter.com/JonathanTurley/status/1546636535763722240?s=20&t=g_UY0vHV88Ycvo-Sjs0yRg 

 
 

Who is online



CB
Hallux


49 visitors