Ohio Judge Lets Pregnant Teen Marry Without Consent...

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by william sire, Oct 23, 2010.

  1. william sire macrumors regular

    william sire

    #1
    After Bride Says Parents Would Force Abortion
    The “source” of this story seems to be the Associated Press. Everybody body that is carrying the story has printed the exact same thing word for word. However this is revealing as to the truth about supporters of “Women’s right to choose.” (Buzz words for abortion.) When the woman/couple “choose” to be responsible for her/their choices and action she had to run away from home and seek the power and protection of the state to do it.
     
  2. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #2
    The parents in this case are in no way representative of those in favour of allowing abortion to stay legal. To claim otherwise is nothing more than empty, ideological rhetoric.
     
  3. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #3
    This has nothing to do with pro choice or pro life sentiments. It has to do with this family being pretty damn screwed up.
     
  4. iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #4
    Seventeen is a "teen" by definition, but from the info presented, the poor, belaboured girl is well out of the influence of her "loving" family.
     
  5. Doc750 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    #5
    Shes pregnant, so she's considered an emancipated minor. She can do whatever she wants.
     
  6. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #6
    What presented information are you basing this on? The article is rather short and conflicting.
     
  7. iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #7
    It is, and more confusing by it's lack of depth.

    But I still cling to the freedom of her to make this choice.
     
  8. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #8
    Absolutely. Which I think would be the majority opinion. Funnily enough individuals in the fox news comment section seem to be the ones having the most problem with the daughters autonomy in this case.
     
  9. iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #9
    Oh Christ, a "news" organisation being a medium for change. :confused:

    "Will no one rid me of this turbulent quasi news network?" :rolleyes:
     
  10. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #10
    From the Washington Post article...

    Ohio law requires parents to sign off on the marriage of anyone younger than 18, but judges can waive the requirement.


    And the judge did.

    'Nuff said... for now.


    Citing the actual law would be helpful.

    Edit: here is a PDF of a brochure from the Ohio School Boards Association that discusses emancipated minors. The causes listed for emancipation include: entering the armed forces, marriage, becoming employed, and being self-supporting. No mention of pregnancy being a qualifying condition.

    The act of the parents is important to a determination about emancipation. In this case, the parents have manifested their apparent intention to release their claim upon the child’s services or earnings. A child who runs away from home is not emancipated, unless a court finds otherwise. This is because it is the parents who have the right to release their claim upon the child’s services and earnings. The Interstate Compact on Juveniles provides that a child who has absconded, escaped or run away may be returned across state lines to his or her parents or guardians.
     
  11. CorvusCamenarum macrumors 65816

    CorvusCamenarum

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL
    #11
    I'm reasonably certain there have been hoards of 16 year old girls that have sought abortions without their parents' consent.

    I don't think there's anything new to see here, except the judge should have heard what the parents had to say before issuing said ruling.
     
  12. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #12
    I have a feeling we are missing some information.
    While assuming the information the girl said about her parents are true I do not disagree with the judge at all. The only thing that I question is why were the parents no summed to be in court to defend themselves from the judge. That is the only thing I have an issue with.
    While it may not of changed anything at least they had a chance to defend themselves.
     
  13. Counterfit macrumors G3

    Counterfit

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2003
    Location:
    sitting on your shoulder
    #13
    Yes, that's how the AP (and other wire services) works. They write a story, and subscribing organizations (newspapers, websites, etc.) can reprint the story in whole.
     
  14. Epsilon88 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    #14
    Good decision on the part of the judge. But how can parents "force" their kids to have an abortion? I don't think a doctor would strap down a patient and do a forcible abortion.
     
  15. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #15
    No but the endless pressure from the parents and threats can end up causing the kids to give in. I have seen the effects on parents more or less forcing what degree they will get in college to the point that they will tell them what classes to take ect. It really not much different than that. Just to a more extreme case. Those same kids fight with their parents but often loss.

    Parent hold a huge amount of influence over their kids.
     
  16. Epsilon88 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    #16
    Good point. I just meant that they couldn't force in the literal sense, which the article seemed to imply.
     
  17. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #17
    Then it is lucky the state has the power to ensure the woman with the womb makes the decision. How is this in any way at odds with pro-choice arguments?

    Your extreme prejudices are allowing you to look a fool. Really, think before posting.
     
  18. Karnivore macrumors 6502

    Karnivore

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2010
    #18
    I agree with the judge. If she's old enough to emancipate then she's old enough to get married. Waiting few more months until she turned 18 would've changed nothing as far as her welfare is concerned.
     
  19. william sire thread starter macrumors regular

    william sire

    #19
    You too should make a practice of the doing this before you foolishly and falsely criticize me for not doing it. In quoting my original comment I highlighted what you failed to comprehend, if you even read it. My criticism was of the proponents of “choice.” (aka=abortion) The Proponents of “choice” (aka=abortion) (the parents) have by the what is revealed of the young girls perspective, decided that “choice” does not included taking responsibility for her actions. As well they have decided that a woman’s right to do what she wants to do with her own body is limited to what the people who support that idea have determined are the perimeters of executing that right.

    The state ensuring that the woman with the womb makes the decision had nothing do to with anything. The woman with the womb made the decision before she even got pregnant. Making that decision resulted in her pregnancy then she had to flee the proponents of "choice” (abortion supporters) to protect that right to do what she wanted to do with her own body. Then finally had to seek action of the state on her behalf to cut off the influence of the supports of “a woman’s right to choose,” so she could be free to exercise he right to choose to accept responsibility for her decisions.

    This is at odds with the “pro-choice” arguments because it is the “pro-choice” people (in this case, obviously the parents) that did not want her to have a “choice.” Or actually from their position they did because from their position, from the perspective of the girl, “choice” and abortion the same.
     
  20. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #20
    I know what you were saying. I just pointed out that they do not need to go that far to force an abortion.
     
  21. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #21
    Rubbish. You have obviously decided based on the parents of the girl trying to force their decision onto her that all pro-choice advocates are "pro-abortion", an entirely ridiculous extrapolation for anyone to make.

    If you are truly pro-choice you always believe it to be the decision of the woman carrying the foetus. I notice you only believe in that being right when the woman's own decision backs your own, but don't project your own failings in that regard onto everyone else. The right outcome happened in this case, just as it would have been the right decision if the young lady had chosen to terminate against her parents' wishes. This is exactly why the state needs to have the power to step in, to ensure that the individual involved always has final say.
     
  22. CaptMurdock macrumors 6502a

    CaptMurdock

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Location:
    The Evildrome Boozerama
    #22
    The fact that the parents of the girl were going to try force their daughter to have an abortion makes them the antithesis of "pro-choice." In your mind, "pro-choice" is equal to "forcing abortion on others." No reasonable person holds this view.

    You can spin this story any way you want to fit your agenda. Nobody here is fooled. Try it on Free Republic; they're a lot more willing to accept this kind of swill.
     
  23. Rt&Dzine macrumors 6502a

    Rt&Dzine

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2008
  24. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #24
    Quite.
     
  25. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #25
    So when a gay teen kills themselves rather than allow their parents to exert their fundamentalist christian viewpoint via "gay conversion", we can blame chrstianity et. al., correct?

    Good to know.
     

Share This Page