PDA

View Full Version : holy mother of god




kirkblitz
04-04-2008, 04:07 AM
The reason im putting this in politics is do you think this girl deserves death for this? Lowest form of scum possible, right down there with the people that roast puppies alive on the grill for fun.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080404/ap_on_re_us/bathroom_baby

BAYTOWN, Texas - A 14-year-old girl gave birth in a restroom at her junior high, and the baby boy cried once before she tried to flush him down the toilet, killing him, officials said Thursday.
ADVERTISEMENT

An autopsy confirmed the baby was alive when born Wednesday at Cedar Bayou Junior High in Baytown, near Houston. The boy was probably full term and cried before the mother, an eighth-grader, tried to flush him, said police Lt. Eric Freed.

The mother was taken to a hospital. People who knew her at school said she wore baggy clothing, and nobody suspected she was pregnant, The Houston Chronicle reported Thursday.

School officials learned of her pregnancy when another student who was in the restroom while the eighth-grader was in labor went to ask the school nurse for help, said Kathy Clausen, spokeswoman for Baytown's Goose Creek school district.

The nurse and an assistant principal ran to the bathroom, discovered the girl had given birth and called 911.

Authorities have not announced what charges the girl will face, if any. Killing an infant is a capital crime in Texas, but 14-year-olds are too young to be eligible for the death penalty, said Geoffrey Corn, an assistant professor at South Texas College of Law.

The infant died just three days after another 14-year-old girl delivered a stillborn fetus in the bathroom of an airplane on her way back to Houston from a middle-school field trip.

Baytown is about 25 miles east of Houston.

Sandra
04-04-2008, 05:28 AM
Anybody that is capable of doing this scares the hell out of me. No death penalty,but she should go to prison for the rest of her natural life.

CoreyBowen999
04-04-2008, 05:29 AM
Shit.. thats right down the road from me

thuja
04-04-2008, 05:36 AM
but what in our society is causing this kind of thing?
why did she and the father of the child have unprotected sex? why was she afraid of her parents? imagine her terror?

Sandra
04-04-2008, 06:04 AM
but what in our society is causing this kind of thing?
why did she and the father of the child have unprotected sex? why was she afraid of her parents? imagine her terror?

What kind of "terrified girl" tried to FLUSH a baby down the toilet.:mad:

Here we go with the baby doesn't matter crowd.

thuja
04-04-2008, 06:18 AM
What kind of "terrified girl" tried to FLUSH a baby down the toilet.:mad:

Here we go with the baby doesn't matter crowd.

no, i am not ignoring the death of the innocent baby, and, like you, am horrified. i would be horrified, too, if this concerned an animal, let alone a human baby.
the problem i was addressing is the problem of no education. what i am wondering is how the girl ever got to this, and what was lacking in education in understanding and compassion. to her, that baby was only a symtom of a problem. so what did she miss in life , in her own home and in school, and in her ife in general?

FreeTraveler
04-04-2008, 06:19 AM
but what in our society is causing this kind of thing?
why did she and the father of the child have unprotected sex? why was she afraid of her parents? imagine her terror?

Yeah, sure, it's society's fault, or her mother's, or anybody but hers.

Stick her head in the toilet and flush until dead.

FreeTraveler
04-04-2008, 06:20 AM
no, i am not ignoring the death of the innocent baby, and, like you, am horrified. i would be horrified, too, if this concerned an animal, let alone a human baby.
the problem i was addressing is the problem of no education. what i am wondering is how the girl ever got to this, and what was lacking in education in understanding and compassion. to her, that baby was only a symtom of a problem. so what did she miss in life , in her own home and in school, and in her ife in general?

When parents willingly turn their children over to goberment indoctrination center at 5 years of age, don't be surprised by the animals that are created.

thuja
04-04-2008, 06:24 AM
When parents willingly turn their children over to goberment indoctrination center at 5 years of age, don't be surprised by the animals that are created.

yes, maybe this IS the problem. most of us are fortunate to have parents and others who taught us, and let us be exopsed to others and to situatons that allowed us to learn real life common sense and real values, responsibility and compassion.
i guess everyone is totally on their own with barely any education now. good luck.

amy31416
04-04-2008, 06:28 AM
Still not quite sure how any parent could miss the fact that their daughter was pregnant for 9 months straight. I guess it happens though.

thuja
04-04-2008, 06:28 AM
Yeah, sure, it's society's fault, or her mother's, or anybody but hers.

Stick her head in the toilet and flush until dead.
if we deal with it this way, few people will be left. oops! population control?

coyote_sprit
04-04-2008, 06:33 AM
Yeah, sure, it's society's fault, or her mother's, or anybody but hers.

Stick her head in the toilet and flush until dead.

Would the society have condemned her for being pregnant at 14? I'm not saying it's anyone's fault but living in a judgemental society can stop you from taking reasonable actions.

Sandra
04-04-2008, 06:35 AM
Would the society have condemned her for being pregnant at 14?

No, especially in that area it is quite common. What society will condemn her for is murdering her newborn infant in such a horrific way.

This is the second time in a week that a Baytown /Houston 14 year old left a dead infant in a toilet.

micahnelson
04-04-2008, 06:38 AM
Trying to figure out the cause of something doesn't mean you don't care about justice.

This is the same as trying to figure out the root causes of terrorism. We certainly don't whitewash the sins of the terrorists that are out there, but unless we know what makes them act the way they do we cannot defeat them. A lack of understanding of the problem when attempting to solve it can exacerbate the problem.

This girl is obviously uneducated, and likely felt shamed into doing what she did. Perhaps her parents would have judged her for having premarital sex or having an abortion, but never got around to mentioning that murder was wrong. Perhaps the school didn't discuss adoption in sex ed. I believe she should be tried with first degree murder if they can prove her intentions during the entire pregnancy was to kill the child. If she did not know what do with the child and killed it out of panic, then she should be guilty of a lesser charge.

Hopefully this incident can serve as a way for parents to talk to their children, and students to discuss with teachers how to handle an unwanted pregnancy without murder. I only mention teachers because in a world where a 14 year old can bring a child to term without the parents knowing- parental involvement may be a non issue for some children.

coyote_sprit
04-04-2008, 06:38 AM
No, especially in that area it is quite common. What society will condemn her for is murdering her newborn infant in such a horrific way.

This is the second time in a week that a Baytown /Houston 14 year old left a dead infant in a toilet.

"such a horrific way"? Then would an abortion have been a better alternative?

thuja
04-04-2008, 06:40 AM
No, especially in that area it is quite common. What society will condemn her for is murdering her newborn infant in such a horrific way.

This is the second time in a week that a Baytown /Houston 14 year old left a dead infant in a toilet.

evidently girls are getting pregnat too early, and perhaps THAT should be popular to condemn, so worse things don't happen.
have you noticed the so called tank tops, that now look like maternity tops? check out jcrew.com, for example. i guess those pregnant celebrites are effective.

micahnelson
04-04-2008, 06:44 AM
"such a horrific way"? Then would an abortion have been a better alternative?

an early term abortion would have been a more humane form of murder- the difference between nullifying someone's ability to feel pain before you kill them and crushing / drowning someone.

Don't get me wrong, I don't condone the taking of human life for any reason beyond self defense (which of course includes this girl who murdered her child), but I think the manner of murder shows that she can't even claim to have any concern for the child's welfare- not even to murder it in a humane way.

I guess some would say, what is the difference? I suppose not much of a difference to the end result, but it does say a lot about the person committing the crime.

coyote_sprit
04-04-2008, 06:50 AM
an early term abortion would have been a more humane form of murder- the difference between nullifying someone's ability to feel pain before you kill them and crushing / drowning someone.

Don't get me wrong, I don't condone the taking of human life for any reason beyond self defense (which of course includes this girl who murdered her child), but I think the manner of murder shows that she can't even claim to have any concern for the child's welfare- not even to murder it in a humane way.

I guess some would say, what is the difference? I suppose not much of a difference to the end result, but it does say a lot about the person committing the crime.

I too think she should have had an early term abortion but imagine what people around her would think of her. I think she let the pressure get to her until it was too late and then couldn't turn back. She should still be punished though but people should try to get to the cause so it doesn't happen again and I think the cause is people frowning to much upon abortion until it leads someone to do this.

Sandra
04-04-2008, 06:52 AM
What it all comes down to is a 14 year old girl KNOWS she is pregnant and proceeded to murder the child because she didn't want his cries heard. 14 year olds are not innocent creatures by any stretch of the imagination.

thuja
04-04-2008, 06:57 AM
younger celebrities(that people here are tired of seeing on the news )are examples for behavior lately. girls without education think emulating those celebrities is a good thing, and try to behave like them and look like them. (and they are often wearing maternity type tops.)

Dr.3D
04-04-2008, 07:02 AM
Not too much difference between what she did and an abortion. The only reason the baby doesn't cry in an abortion is because they never let it get any air to cry with. It's not like they give the baby any kind of anesthesia before they cut it up and suck it out. Which is better, to be cut up or drowned? In both cases, it's murder.

micahnelson
04-04-2008, 07:15 AM
i think it depends on the type of abortion we are discussing. certainly before nervous systems are formed pain isn't felt.

Again, i am not afraid of facts here. Saying its ok to murder someone because they won't feel it or understand is like saying its ok to Rob someone who is rich and won't miss the money or too dumb to realize he has been robbed.

thuja
04-04-2008, 07:19 AM
wait! someone asked if the girl deserves death for this. THIS horror story started with unprotected sex. should the guy be punished too? should the uneducated girl go to hell by herself? is she already in hell now?

allyinoh
04-04-2008, 07:23 AM
Well I think at 14 years old you know what murder is and what it isn't. There are safe havens everywhere. She could have had the baby and dropped it off at a hospital or police station, no questions asked.

She decided to murder her baby and fully knew what she was doing and the outcome that would happen. If a jury of her peers finds that she should face the death penalty, then so be it. If they find that she should be in prison for life, so be it.

I don't think that the reason people kill their infants is because they were too afraid to have an abortion. If you are willing to murder a newborn after giving birth without a care, there would be no issues with having an abortion.

Also, babies can feel pain inside the womb. There was an ultrasound that came out a while ago I believe it was a baby in the FIRST trimester and you could see that the baby was frantically trying to get away from the instrument that was about to murder it.

However, this discussion is not about abortion, it is about a girl giving birth to a child then murdering it.

Cinderella
04-04-2008, 07:36 AM
she deserves death or life in jail.....she knew what she was doing....the fact she did it to muffle his cries is disgusting.....its everyones fault she is this way.....brings us back to the age old question of are we who we are because of genetics or because of our environment....i believe both factors affect who we turn out to be....noone knows her psychological state and noone knows the kind of environment she lives in....im sure it doesnt help that our children our desensitized to life and death.....its scary but this behavior is the result of a society gone wayyyyyyy bad

micahnelson
04-04-2008, 08:06 AM
I think we need to consider how equality under the law is balanced in the responsibility for children. Certainly a woman is responsible for the wellbeing of her child. It bothers me the man only has to impregnate and write a check every now and then.

Without regard for her, or potential children, he engaged in an act with this woman who put her in this position. Yes, punish her- but I fail to see how justice is served if nothing happens to him. The whole of our laws is to correct the natural order of might makes right. This is why I may not steal from you or violate your rights, even though I have the physical capacity to do so. What is there to check a man's ability to engage in a predatory reproductive strategy, simply because he has the physical capacity to do so?

Im still thinking this through, you cant and should not force people into commitments to each other by law, but certainly we ought to be legally responsible for the life we create- for who else is responsible if the parents are not?

Kade
04-04-2008, 08:17 AM
but what in our society is causing this kind of thing?
why did she and the father of the child have unprotected sex? why was she afraid of her parents? imagine her terror?

The society that vehemently makes her feel scared out of her life, and keeps her from other medical options.

No doubt, a mother instinctively knows when she is fit to be a mother. That we have screwed with nature in this way only points to the simple fact that we are not looking at abortion issue correctly.

I know many are going to disagree, and at the helm of those people will be ones who think this girl deserves any prison time whatsoever.

Roxi
04-04-2008, 08:32 AM
she deserves death or life in jail.....she knew what she was doing....the fact she did it to muffle his cries is disgusting.....its everyones fault she is this way.....brings us back to the age old question of are we who we are because of genetics or because of our environment....i believe both factors affect who we turn out to be....noone knows her psychological state and noone knows the kind of environment she lives in....im sure it doesnt help that our children our desensitized to life and death.....its scary but this behavior is the result of a society gone wayyyyyyy bad

gosh, more and more i see we are on the same page ;) no really though i seem agree 100% with every post i have seen from you lately... this is exactly how i feel

i was just talking about that last night how every aspect of our lives from birth helps form who we are, while i do believe genetics plays a major part in our personalities and even other things that are just bizzare i think every action causes a reaction and thats true even with human development.

i think that in 15-20 years that girl is going to suffer more over this than prison will ever do to her, so even though i am against the basic principle of prison i think that letting her live and finding out later what she did is a more just punishment then just injecting her with something to kill her. Im just glad im not in TX so i don't have to pay for her incarceration... im so curious to know about this girls family and what kind of people they were

thuja
04-04-2008, 08:32 AM
that is the ideal, to have a woman understand and wish for the responsibility and joy of having her child, and the man to do the same. probably in this situation there was no such wish, and it was just sex, perhaps even rape, who knows but the two people involved?
most people at 14 are not wishing for a family.
maybe the girl, all alone, was so terrified the whole time that she could not find what she did not even know was available in the way of help? maybe her parents, if any, were fearsome to her. maybe she was just toughing it out, hoping it would go away somehow. maybe when people approached she got even more scared and acted on her first thought, which may have been to get rid of the evidence?
i am praying for her, because i am imagining how life is for her today. she has lived with confusion and fear, and NOW WHAT?

Roxi
04-04-2008, 08:34 AM
another question for you guys...

increasingly all over the country parents are now responsible for their minor childs actions... do you think they will charge the parents with a crime?.... do you think they should?....

thuja
04-04-2008, 08:39 AM
The society that vehemently makes her feel scared out of her life, and keeps her from other medical options.

No doubt, a mother instinctively knows when she is fit to be a mother. That we have screwed with nature in this way only points to the simple fact that we are not looking at abortion issue correctly.

I know many are going to disagree, and at the helm of those people will be ones who think this girl deserves any prison time whatsoever.
it is odd how people swarm in eager to punish anyone possible, seemingly in an effort to protect themselves somehow. this person is already punished, and not in some small way.

micahnelson
04-04-2008, 08:42 AM
The society that vehemently makes her feel scared out of her life, and keeps her from other medical options.

No doubt, a mother instinctively knows when she is fit to be a mother. That we have screwed with nature in this way only points to the simple fact that we are not looking at abortion issue correctly.

I know many are going to disagree, and at the helm of those people will be ones who think this girl deserves any prison time whatsoever.

The Medical options that you discuss only involve ending a life inside the womb instead of outside. Since this is murder, not abortion, we don't even have to get into the abortion debate.

A woman killed a baby. Yes, lets discover why. If she was willing to carry the child to term, why wasn't she willing to consider adoption? That child could be laying in a crib right now with two very thankful parents. This is a tragedy for all around, but justice must be served. A human child's rights were violated.

No one is asking a 14 year old girl to become a full time mother, but for God's sake we have options in our society besides infanticide.

JS4Pat
04-04-2008, 08:43 AM
Anybody that is capable of doing this scares the hell out of me. No death penalty,but she should go to prison for the rest of her natural life.

+1

Cinderella
04-04-2008, 08:47 AM
u cant condem her for doing what is seen as the norm nowadays....its "normal" for these young teens to be in sexual relationships earlier than ever before because that is what they see and that is what is being shoved down their throat by the MSM/gov.....its how they define their relationships....where as before it used to be holding hands or playing footsies or teasing the one u like now its just more extreme....they are desensitized about sex....they have no idea what it means to do something like that and im sure they have no idea the consequences that come with it....look at the young spears girl...shes 16 and prego...im sure because of her lots of teens will think they can do the same.....problem is they dont have millions of dollars or someone they can dump the baby off with so they can continue their life....its the norm of today....its basically assumed that once in a relationship u solidify it by having sex to prove that this is a real relationship....its whats on tv all over the newspapers and magazines..........then the ironic part is that they promote these behaviors but then condem u for behaving this way?? screwy society we live in.......promote the behavior then make u feel shameful or scared or powerless when it goes wrong.....

thuja
04-04-2008, 08:49 AM
another question for you guys...

increasingly all over the country parents are now responsible for their minor childs actions... do you think they will charge the parents with a crime?.... do you think they should?....
parenting, which was not even a word not too long ago, always was a social responsibility in addition to a personal one. now, however, there is a lot of scrutiny placed on parents actions and results, and things like these will cause more.
certainly her parents will face this, but it's likely that the burden will be placed on her at merely 14 years old.

thuja
04-04-2008, 08:55 AM
u cant condem her for doing what is seen as the norm nowadays....its "normal" for these young teens to be in sexual relationships earlier than ever before because that is what they see and that is what is being shoved down their throat by the MSM/gov.....its how they define their relationships....where as before it used to be holding hands or playing footsies or teasing the one u like now its just more extreme....they are desensitized about sex....they have no idea what it means to do something like that and im sure they have no idea the consequences that come with it....look at the young spears girl...shes 16 and prego...im sure because of her lots of teens will think they can do the same.....problem is they dont have millions of dollars or someone they can dump the baby off with so they can continue their life....its the norm of today....its basically assumed that once in a relationship u solidify it by having sex to prove that this is a real relationship....its whats on tv all over the newspapers and magazines..........then the ironic part is that they promote these behaviors but then condem u for behaving this way?? screwy society we live in.......promote the behavior then make u feel shameful or scared or powerless when it goes wrong.....
when you are a teenager, you want, usually, to be like the most popular idols of the day. i used to like Doris Day, thank God.

christagious
04-04-2008, 10:43 AM
Yeah, sure, it's society's fault, or her mother's, or anybody but hers.

Stick her head in the toilet and flush until dead.

I agree with you 500%, there's no excuse for what she did, not matter what the others on this thread try to say. I say kill the bitch.

Kraig
04-04-2008, 10:59 AM
Anybody that is capable of doing this scares the hell out of me. No death penalty,but she should go to prison for the rest of her natural life.

Good luck convincing a child that this is somehow wrong while abortion is somehow right. What do you honestly think kids will learn from the morality we have forced on them?

Kraig
04-04-2008, 11:06 AM
no, i am not ignoring the death of the innocent baby, and, like you, am horrified. i would be horrified, too, if this concerned an animal, let alone a human baby.
the problem i was addressing is the problem of no education. what i am wondering is how the girl ever got to this, and what was lacking in education in understanding and compassion. to her, that baby was only a symtom of a problem. so what did she miss in life , in her own home and in school, and in her ife in general?

The thing she was lacking in education was when someone told her that it was somehow ok to kill her baby while it was still in the womb, while not ok to kill it as soon as it left. You can't subject such an absurd moral standard on a child, and accept them to accept it in the same, irrational, manor you have. Society has said abortion is good, yet killing a baby a second it is born is evil. This is irrational and the thinking mind (the mind of a child) will try to make sense of it. The thinking mind will understand that the difference of a few days and minutes, and the change of location, do not define a being's moral right to life. From that point on, they will either fully accept the standard of death, as this girl has, or they will realize that abortion is just as evil as what this girl did.

tod evans
04-04-2008, 11:11 AM
this is a subject that i`m not qualified to pass judgement on....
a minor killing her offspring....pretty sad!

Gadsden Flag
04-04-2008, 12:30 PM
Our degenerate culture is what causes these problems.

Kade
04-04-2008, 01:39 PM
Our degenerate culture is what causes these problems.

You know, you're right! Let's get the Federal Government involved and legislate sin!

HollyforRP
04-04-2008, 01:47 PM
Notice the town you posted. Sounds like it would be a small town.

HollyforRP
04-04-2008, 01:51 PM
No one is asking a 14 year old girl to become a full time mother, but for God's sake we have options in our society besides infanticide.


She's 14! Something is going on in the family that should be questioned but you're treating a 14 year old girl as though she is capable of making the best decisions regarding life when people should be looking at these factors.

1. The town she is in. (abstinace only programs +southern baptist brainwashing...you do the math)

2. Were her parents apart of a southern baptist program that taught her that abortion was evil?


What would a 14 year old who is about to be a father have to worry about and what would he do?

What would any of you do if you were a father at 14? I bet you would skip state :rolleyes:

Kraig
04-04-2008, 01:55 PM
Were her parents apart of a southern baptist program that taught her that abortion was evil?

Why is this evil but abortion isn't? It's a small difference of time and location.

HollyforRP
04-04-2008, 02:10 PM
Why is this evil but abortion isn't? It's a small difference of time and location.

Both are in my opinion but what happens is the teen panics because at home her parents are teaching her to be a fine upstanding nun. the daughter rebels and gets pregnant. She hides her pregnancy because her parents have drilled into her head abortion is evil, southern baptist rules, abstinance etc..

She wasn't taught about how valuable life is, she was taught how evil it is to have sex. She was taught she would be viewed of as an evil whore etc...

I mean hell just look at some of you. "Kill the bitch" Sounds like burn the witch.

You call her a "woman"

She's a 14 year old teen. She's not an adult and while I think what she did was wrong, we're going to see way more of these cases. It's not all about the parents either.

In some cases it could be the school system or both. If you go to a small town especially in Texas, Arkansas, Oklahoma you will see 12-15 year olds working on their second child.

Their school system teaches abstinance only.

On top of that, media. Like it was already mentioned. Media uses people like Britney Spears to promote younger teens act like that and dress like that. There are even thongs for 7 year olds! WTF!

Yet another reason why we need a revampment on the system but it's not just the system, people need their power back.

Another problem is that parents have lost their right to spank without the fear of CPS coming after them.

It has been proven that psychological torture has more of a negative impact on the mind and what no spanking promotes is more emotional approach which could result in unintended mental abuse.

Spanking is not cruel. Abusing your power is cruel. Overdoing it is cruel. Psychological abuse is even more cruel than spanking.

Seriously, what would you as a 14 year old male teenager do if you found out your girlfriend is pregnant?

You can't just say get a job because all the jobs you could do at your age are supposedly jobs Americans don't want to do.

Mckarnin
04-04-2008, 02:14 PM
Still not quite sure how any parent could miss the fact that their daughter was pregnant for 9 months straight. I guess it happens though.


The same way they miss a lot of other things about their kid's lives. Urgh! How sad.

While I find her capacity to act in such a way disgusting and terrifying in terms of her upbringing, state of mind, support network, education and potentially character (BTW, I am pro-life)...I have no way of knowing what kind of terror she was in. Chances are that she was the only person in the world who knew she was pregnant. Could be that her father raped her and said that he'd kill her if she told anyone or a similar situation...at 14 she can't drive, if no one else in the world knows, that far into pregnancy how would she get to a hospital or get any help without lengthy explanations, reprimands, possible physical harm...she probably didn't have any way of knowing how far along in her pregnancy she was and may have been utterly shocked that the baby arrived when it did. She could easily have been in deep denial about the pregnancy. Of course that kind of blatant disregard for human life is extremely disturbing but if she lived in a household where no one noticed her pregnancy chances are she is pretty used to blatant disregard for human life, in particular her own.

banjojambo9
04-04-2008, 02:21 PM
Its always so easy to judge i think it's annoying, pompous and downright ridiculous at times.
people should let other people live their own lives. This girl will feel like shit the rest of her life .

Malakai0
04-04-2008, 03:08 PM
Sorry but this is a societal problem and not solely the fault of the 14 year old kid here.

Imagine how terrifying having a baby alone in a school bathroom would be, your usually in a hospital drugged up and surrounded by medical personnel and family keeping you cool (or trying to). Not to mention around half the age of most people popping out babies.

Our society is deeply fucked up and incidents like this are symptoms. Throwing this girl in prison for the rest of her life before it's even really started will not help prevent the same thing from happening in the future whatsoever.

Until we are willing to reassess our society and government (and monetary system to start with) into something better, expect things like this to continue to increase in number and severity.
Our government does clearly immoral things every day, and proclaims to the states and people that it is moral because it's in OUR best interest. The more ruthless and exploitive corporations get, the more money they make and the more government favor they get. Selfishness is rewarded, selflessness is punished. You come first, before all else, right or wrong. Are we now surprised that people grow up believing just that?
As the economy gets worse crime and selfish 'immoral behavior' will only increase.

Honestly I'm considering investing in a nice rifle for the coming years. =)

amy31416
04-04-2008, 03:36 PM
The same way they miss a lot of other things about their kid's lives. Urgh! How sad.

While I find her capacity to act in such a way disgusting and terrifying in terms of her upbringing, state of mind, support network, education and potentially character (BTW, I am pro-life)...I have no way of knowing what kind of terror she was in. Chances are that she was the only person in the world who knew she was pregnant. Could be that her father raped her and said that he'd kill her if she told anyone or a similar situation...at 14 she can't drive, if no one else in the world knows, that far into pregnancy how would she get to a hospital or get any help without lengthy explanations, reprimands, possible physical harm...she probably didn't have any way of knowing how far along in her pregnancy she was and may have been utterly shocked that the baby arrived when it did. She could easily have been in deep denial about the pregnancy. Of course that kind of blatant disregard for human life is extremely disturbing but if she lived in a household where no one noticed her pregnancy chances are she is pretty used to blatant disregard for human life, in particular her own.

I agree with you here, that's what is most shocking to me is that she was so disregarded that nobody noticed she was pregnant or going through anything. I can't imagine that she was very much in her right mind either, I mean, did she really think she could flush a baby down a toilet?

I think back to when I was 14, I hadn't even, ahem, become a woman yet in the biological sense and I knew zilch about sex (pretty conservative upbringing you might say.) I can't imagine if I had been sexually active and it happened to me, my father, truly would have killed me (or so I would have thought.) Honestly though, I probably would have ended up killing myself first.

At that age, I think you have to give the majority of blame to the parents, part to the girl and maybe a little on society.

Kraig
04-04-2008, 03:36 PM
Both are in my opinion but what happens is the teen panics because at home her parents are teaching her to be a fine upstanding nun. the daughter rebels and gets pregnant. She hides her pregnancy because her parents have drilled into her head abortion is evil, southern baptist rules, abstinance etc..

She wasn't taught about how valuable life is, she was taught how evil it is to have sex. She was taught she would be viewed of as an evil whore etc...

I mean hell just look at some of you. "Kill the bitch" Sounds like burn the witch.

You call her a "woman"

She's a 14 year old teen. She's not an adult and while I think what she did was wrong, we're going to see way more of these cases. It's not all about the parents either.

In some cases it could be the school system or both. If you go to a small town especially in Texas, Arkansas, Oklahoma you will see 12-15 year olds working on their second child.

Their school system teaches abstinance only.

On top of that, media. Like it was already mentioned. Media uses people like Britney Spears to promote younger teens act like that and dress like that. There are even thongs for 7 year olds! WTF!

Yet another reason why we need a revampment on the system but it's not just the system, people need their power back.

Another problem is that parents have lost their right to spank without the fear of CPS coming after them.

It has been proven that psychological torture has more of a negative impact on the mind and what no spanking promotes is more emotional approach which could result in unintended mental abuse.

Spanking is not cruel. Abusing your power is cruel. Overdoing it is cruel. Psychological abuse is even more cruel than spanking.

Seriously, what would you as a 14 year old male teenager do if you found out your girlfriend is pregnant?

You can't just say get a job because all the jobs you could do at your age are supposedly jobs Americans don't want to do.

I agree with most of what you had said, but you did not answer my question. I think we both agree that flushing a baby down a toilet moments after birth is evil. Do we agree that abortion is equally evil?

My point is that when you have legalized murder, when you have taught children that it is okay to kill an un-born child - this is the result of that. How can you attribute teaching abstinence to this? Obviously, she wasn't taught abstinence effectively because she became pregnant and killed the child. The teachers of abstinence that I have come across do not teach that you should refrain from sex entirely, but that you should refrain from sex until you are willing and able to have a child. It is the teachers of "choice" that preach that you should have as much "safe-sex" as you want, and if you then become pregnant, to go have it terminated if it's not what you want. So which teaching did she follow?

Why is it okay to kill a child inside the womb, but evil moments after that child leaves?

SeanEdwards
04-04-2008, 03:37 PM
No, 14 years old is plenty old enough to understand murder and its consequences. If I had any say in the case, I'd demand the bitch be treated as an adult. I don't think it's a crime deserving of the death penalty, but I do think it deserves jail time, and mandatory sterilization. I think 10-12 years in prison sounds about right.

nate895
04-04-2008, 03:42 PM
The death penalty issue is one issue I disagree with Ron Paul on. That being said, I wouldn't have this girl executed, though she should be put in prison for either the rest of her life or as long as permitted under Texas Law if she cannot be charged as an adult.

amy31416
04-04-2008, 03:51 PM
The death penalty issue is one issue I disagree with Ron Paul on. That being said, I wouldn't have this girl executed, though she should be put in prison for either the rest of her life or as long as permitted under Texas Law if she cannot be charged as an adult.

That may well be true. Perhaps she is a sociopath--but how can you make that judgment without knowing the details of the case? How can any of us? I tend more towards the sympathetic end, but I also realize that with what little I know, I could be sympathizing with a killer. None of us here have enough information to decide.

I do agree with RP on the death penalty, btw.

SeanEdwards
04-04-2008, 03:53 PM
Its always so easy to judge i think it's annoying, pompous and downright ridiculous at times.
people should let other people live their own lives. This girl will feel like shit the rest of her life .

Wait a second, you just berated other people for judging the matter, and then you do exactly the same thing when you assume that the girl will feel remorse for this act. How do you know what that girl feels about the matter? You think she will feel like shit? Well I think, based on her behavior, that it's more likely that she'll feel like SHE was the victim somehow. That the baby was messing up her life, getting in her way, and now all these fuddy duddy old people are hasseling her for takin care of bidness. I suspect that she is a self-centered little cunt, with practically no empathy for other people. Is that all her fault? Did society inculcate this me-first attitude? Maybe. What difference does it make? We can't punish society, but we sure can make examples of the individuals who break society's rules.

Original_Intent
04-04-2008, 04:00 PM
wait! someone asked if the girl deserves death for this. THIS horror story started with unprotected sex. should the guy be punished too? should the uneducated girl go to hell by herself? is she already in hell now?

Did the boyfriend kill the baby? (No)
If the girl had wanted an abortion and the father said no, would anyone have listened to him? (No)
Does the boyfriend share responsibility for creating that life? Yes! Let's get back to the point where boys are shamed into doing the right thing when they get a girl pregnant and show a little responsibility. But in this case it appears the girl acted alone, you don't punish the bf for a crime he didn't commit (which was the murder).

unklejman
04-04-2008, 04:02 PM
Both are in my opinion but what happens is the teen panics because at home her parents are teaching her to be a fine upstanding nun. the daughter rebels and gets pregnant. She hides her pregnancy because her parents have drilled into her head abortion is evil, southern baptist rules, abstinance etc..

She wasn't taught about how valuable life is, she was taught how evil it is to have sex. She was taught she would be viewed of as an evil whore etc...

First of all you don't know what she was "tought" Secondly you have a distorted view of reality. Let me give you perspective from an actual person that is a member of a southern baptist church. My church does in fact teach the value of life. They do not teach that you will be viewed as an evil whore if you have premarital sex. Though they do teach that premarital sex is a sin, they also teach that we are human and have a sinful nature. People make mistakes. Sex before marriage is an easy one for a teen to make.




I mean hell just look at some of you. "Kill the bitch" Sounds like burn the witch.


I agree with you here. But guess what? It is my Christian belief that revenge is not right that agrees with you. Justice and revenge are almost never the same.





Spanking is not cruel. Abusing your power is cruel. Overdoing it is cruel. Psychological abuse is even more cruel than spanking.


Agreed



Seriously, what would you as a 14 year old male teenager do if you found out your girlfriend is pregnant?


I would have told our parents and planned on being the father, (marrying the girl) unless she wanted to put the child up for adoption.



You can't just say get a job because all the jobs you could do at your age are supposedly jobs Americans don't want to do.

Obviously my parents would have had to have helped and they probably would have. If not adoption would be the only option.

Andrew-Austin
04-04-2008, 04:02 PM
Not too much difference between what she did and an abortion.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:


Haha, nice one.

A lot of radicals in here looking for revenge. Like HollyforRP said, sounds like a witch hunt.





I would have told our parents and planned on being the father, (marrying the girl) unless she wanted to put the child up for adoption.



Your either lying out your ass, or you must have had saints for parents. Well unfortunately for some people, including myself, my parents sucked. At age 14 I probably would be panicking and feeling like I had absolutely no one to turn to.

allyinoh
04-04-2008, 04:03 PM
The boyfriend nor the parents killed the baby so someone tell me what we would charge them with?

I also find it funny that a girl murders a baby and people are blaming the Baptist church. Give me a break!

The fact is that she took the RIGHT TO LIFE away from another human being. She deserves to rot in jail the rest of her life and think about what she did. She's old enough to understand the consequences of her actions.

HollyforRP
04-04-2008, 04:06 PM
I agree with most of what you had said, but you did not answer my question. I think we both agree that flushing a baby down a toilet moments after birth is evil. Do we agree that abortion is equally evil?

My point is that when you have legalized murder, when you have taught children that it is okay to kill an un-born child - this is the result of that. How can you attribute teaching abstinence to this? Obviously, she wasn't taught abstinence effectively because she became pregnant and killed the child. The teachers of abstinence that I have come across do not teach that you should refrain from sex entirely, but that you should refrain from sex until you are willing and able to have a child. It is the teachers of "choice" that preach that you should have as much "safe-sex" as you want, and if you then become pregnant, to go have it terminated if it's not what you want. So which teaching did she follow?

Why is it okay to kill a child inside the womb, but evil moments after that child leaves?


I did answer your question. First sentence. Both aren't good.

Which teaching did she follow? I don't know. I'd like to know because I have seen a trend of 12-14 year olds in small towns that teach abstinance only getting pregnant and having babies. I've met a 13 year old working on her second child.

Children spend more time in school than they do around their parents and spend more time with their friends. I can't just blame one side when there are several different factors involved that create this kind of enviroment.

I find what she did to be horrible and tragic to a new life, a new being and I'm also curious as to what keeps this pattern going?

Teenage pregnancy is nothing new of course but when a girl gets pregnant she's treated like a skank whore and condemed. The male however, nothing is said. It's been this way for a long time. Should we encourage teen pregnancy? No. Should we expect that teens will be abstinant because we tell them to be? NO. Think of what you were like as a teen.

Should people on one hand condemn abortion but then treat females who are pregnant as no good skanks? No.

Also, not every place endorses dropping off your unborn to a fire station or hospital if you don't want your child and of course being 14 and most likely in a small town, who would she turn to?

I feel that guys can't really empathise with this topic because it will never happen to them unless their own teen daughter gets pregnant.

What I find even more odd is that some conservative families I've met who were very much so against abortion, when it came to their own daughter being pregnant once they found out, they coerced her into getting an abortion or told her "You have no option, abort!"

People can be so judgemental until it hits home.

nate895
04-04-2008, 04:07 PM
The boyfriend nor the parents killed the baby so someone tell me what we would charge them with?

I also find it funny that a girl murders a baby and people are blaming the Baptist church. Give me a break!

The fact is that she took the RIGHT TO LIFE away from another human being. She deserves to rot in jail the rest of her life and think about what she did. She's old enough to understand the consequences of her actions.

The parents I can understand because it is the law that if a minor child does something of this nature, the parents also are responsible.

Renegades
04-04-2008, 04:20 PM
I think I have an idea of how nice of a school it is.

HollyforRP
04-04-2008, 04:24 PM
I think I have an idea of how nice of a school it is.

Care to discuss?

CoreyBowen999
04-04-2008, 04:28 PM
Baytown one of the worser parts of town. But I played there for tennis the other day and the people seemed nice enough. Don't condemn a whole town.

Andrew-Austin
04-04-2008, 04:29 PM
The boyfriend nor the parents killed the baby so someone tell me what we would charge them with?

I also find it funny that a girl murders a baby and people are blaming the Baptist church. Give me a break!

The fact is that she took the RIGHT TO LIFE away from another human being. She deserves to rot in jail the rest of her life and think about what she did. She's old enough to understand the consequences of her actions.

Oh really? You know that for a fact do you?

You and I might have been more aware of the consequences and implications of such a thing at age 14, but she could have been in a much more dramatic situation and stressful up bringing.

I love how people here just seem to have perfect lives. Everyone here has always been wise, all knowing, and moral. -Thus the inability to feel any form of empathy for the little girl. Its like no one has ever heard of the concept: we're all partially just products of our environment.

Kraig
04-04-2008, 04:38 PM
I did answer your question. First sentence. Both aren't good.

Which teaching did she follow? I don't know. I'd like to know because I have seen a trend of 12-14 year olds in small towns that teach abstinance only getting pregnant and having babies. I've met a 13 year old working on her second child.

Children spend more time in school than they do around their parents and spend more time with their friends. I can't just blame one side when there are several different factors involved that create this kind of enviroment.

I find what she did to be horrible and tragic to a new life, a new being and I'm also curious as to what keeps this pattern going?

Teenage pregnancy is nothing new of course but when a girl gets pregnant she's treated like a skank whore and condemed. The male however, nothing is said. It's been this way for a long time. Should we encourage teen pregnancy? No. Should we expect that teens will be abstinant because we tell them to be? NO. Think of what you were like as a teen.

Should people on one hand condemn abortion but then treat females who are pregnant as no good skanks? No.

Also, not every place endorses dropping off your unborn to a fire station or hospital if you don't want your child and of course being 14 and most likely in a small town, who would she turn to?

I feel that guys can't really empathise with this topic because it will never happen to them unless their own teen daughter gets pregnant.

What I find even more odd is that some conservative families I've met who were very much so against abortion, when it came to their own daughter being pregnant once they found out, they coerced her into getting an abortion or told her "You have no option, abort!"

People can be so judgemental until it hits home.

Thanks for your reply, I now see that you said "Both are in my opinion", I guess I didn't fully understand what you meant by that before.

My point is that our society and laws have taught people that a babies life isn't valuable, and that sex can be enjoyed without responsibility. This is the practical result of that teaching, I don't find it to be random or unexplainable.

I don't think we should teach our children to practice abstinence because we said so, I think we should teach them to practice it because of the rational reasons to do so. One of those reasons is that you might become pregnant, or make someone become pregnant if you are a male. However, it's difficult to teach this when our laws and our society act as if sex can have no consequences, if "safe-sex" is practiced, and if you do make a mistake you always have abortion as an option. That is why the children of our country are having sex as much as they are, and getting pregnant as much as they are - they have been taught that sex is a casual affair and that pregnancy is an option you can choose both before and after sex, before and after becoming pregnant. This girl followed that teaching, she didn't follow the irrational rules we have attached to it, but it's true meaning.

You said "think what you were like as a teen", I did not have a sexual relationship until I was out of high school, and it really wasn't a big deal to wait until then. By today's standards, I'm pretty sure that would label me as some type of "loser", but I do not subscribe to that type of thinking.

allyinoh
04-04-2008, 04:48 PM
Oh really? You know that for a fact do you?

You and I might have been more aware of the consequences and implications of such a thing at age 14, but she could have been in a much more dramatic situation and stressful up bringing.

I love how people here just seem to have perfect lives. Everyone here has always been wise, all knowing, and moral. -Thus the inability to feel any form of empathy for the little girl. Its like no one has ever heard of the concept: we're all partially just products of our environment.

No one is saying that they have "perfect" lives. I'm sorry that I don't feel sympathetic to murderers.

I know many 14 year olds family and non-family, who comprehend what murder is. So please don't tell me that just because I don't know this specific girl that there's no way that I can tell if a 14 year old knows what murder is.

I don't care how you're brought up, it doesn't change the fact that murder is murder.

HollyforRP
04-04-2008, 04:51 PM
Thinks for your reply, I now see that you said "Both are in my opinion", I guess I didn't fully understand what you meant by that before.

My point is that our society and laws have taught people that a babies life isn't valuable, and that sex can be enjoyed without responsibility. This is the practical result of that teaching, I don't find it to be random or unexplainable.

I don't think we should teach our children to practice abstinence because we said so, I think we should teach them to practice it because of the rational reasons to do so. One of those reasons is that might become pregnant, or make someone become pregnant if you are a male. However, it's difficult to teach this when our laws and our society act as if sex can have no consequences, if "safe-sex" is practiced, and if you do make a mistake you always have abortion as an option. That is why the children of our country are having sex as much as they are, and getting pregnant as much as they are - they have been taught that sex is a casual affair and that pregnancy is an option you can choose both before and after sex, before and after becoming pregnant. This girl followed that teaching, she didn't follow the irrational rules we have attached to it, but it's true meaning.

You said "think what you were like as a teen", I did not have a sexual relationship until I was out of high school, and it really wasn't a big deal to wait until then. By today's standards, I'm pretty sure that would label me as some type of "loser", but I do not subscribe to that type of thinking.


Yeah I agree that society has turned having a child into something horrible. I don't think having a child should be considered a consequence but it really all depends on circumstance.

Also, yes there is more peer pressure for teens to have sex earlier on. When I was a teen, there were so many males gathering their info of what sex was and what women were like by watching porn. Also, the teen girls would mock and tease the girls who weren't following the current trend dictated by MTV. I can only imagine that it's intesified and increased.

The porn were of course his parents who thought that if they put the tapes in their dresser their teens would never ever go snooping through their stuff.

Maybe parents and teachers could also use some helpful reminders.

Kraig
04-04-2008, 04:51 PM
No one is saying that they have "perfect" lives. I'm sorry that I don't feel sympathetic to murderers.

I know many 14 year olds family and non-family, who comprehend what murder is. So please don't tell me that just because I don't know this specific girl that there's no way that I can tell if a 14 year old knows what murder is.

I don't care how you're brought up, it doesn't change the fact that murder is murder.

I understand what you are saying, but you don't think it would be difficult for a child to understand what murder is - in this case where the difference between murder and completely legal action is a few weeks/months and a change of location? That doesn't make any sense at all, and a child WILL try to make sense of the contradiction while we have, at one point in time or another, decided to ignore it.

nate895
04-04-2008, 04:54 PM
I understand what you are saying, but you don't think it would be difficult for a child to understand what murder is - in this case where the difference between murder and completely legal action is a few weeks/months and a change of location? That doesn't make any sense at all, and a child WILL try to make sense of the contradiction while we have, at one point in time or another, decided to ignore it.

That is why abortion should be considered murder. What is really the difference between something in the womb and out? Nothing but that the fetus is totally dependent on the mother and the newborn is only mostly dependent on the mother.

Kraig
04-04-2008, 05:06 PM
Yeah I agree that society has turned having a child into something horrible. I don't think having a child should be considered a consequence but it really all depends on circumstance.

Having a child should never be considering horrible, but there are very real consequences to having one - and that cannot be changed, they are a physical reality. Those consequences come from the fact that someone is going to have to take care of your child, and it's probably going to be you. It all depends on timing, or like you said - circumstance. If you wait until the right time, until you are ready - the burden of taking complete care of another life will be something you are prepared to do. If you do it prematurely, when you are barely able to care for your own life - or in this girls case completely unable to - it will seem as if having a child will destroy you.

Men's view of sex being a prize, as something for them to pursue not in terms of a single woman of value, but in terms of as many women as possible, holds as much blame as anything else.

ChooseLiberty
04-04-2008, 05:07 PM
1 Just from the location she's probably an illegal Mexican or has illegal parents.

2 She's not very bright if she thought a baby would go down a toilet.

3 Texas law allows you to leave a baby at a hospital or fire station and they will take it with no questions asked.

This is just a symptom of millions of illegal low class Mexicans floating around the system in Southwestern US cities like the fact that the police spend a huge amount of manpower and money on crimes and disturbances caused by illegals. Almost never makes the papers and even when it does it gets buried. Similar with hospitals and public schools of course.

The US is turning into a banana republic before your eyes. But you knew that.

Kraig
04-04-2008, 05:07 PM
That is why abortion should be considered murder. What is really the difference between something in the womb and out? Nothing but that the fetus is totally dependent on the mother and the newborn is only mostly dependent on the mother.

I agree with you completely.

angelatc
04-04-2008, 05:09 PM
why did she and the father of the child have unprotected sex? why was she afraid of her parents? imagine her terror?

Teenagers are just invincible. There's no good reason for half the stuff they do, but they just do it anyway.

Being terrified of her parents....maybe. I was never a :baby person," but the second that I saw my son biology kicked in and I knew I would die for him.

Something is wrong with her if that didn't happen. Killing her won't fix it, and the people who support the death penalty always use the extreme, cut-and-dry examples to crow why it should exist. In practice though, most people are sentenced to death on circumstantial evidence.

nate895
04-04-2008, 05:13 PM
Teenagers are just invincible. There's no good reason for half the stuff they do, but they just do it anyway.

Being terrified of her parents....maybe. I was never a :baby person," but the second that I saw my son biology kicked in and I knew I would die for him.

Something is wrong with her if that didn't happen. Killing her won't fix it, and the people who support the death penalty always use the extreme, cut-and-dry examples to crow why it should exist. In practice though, most people are sentenced to death on circumstantial evidence.

I believe that the death penalty should exist for the reason the founders used it. You get your appeals for 5 years, then die because it's that or the people will have to pay for your crime your entire life.

angelatc
04-04-2008, 05:23 PM
T
My point is that our society and laws have taught people that a babies life isn't valuable, and that sex can be enjoyed without responsibility. This is the practical result of that teaching, I don't find it to be random or unexplainable.
.

Having once been a girl, I think the problem also stems from the fact that people do not celebrate all babies. The Christian right were freaking mean to that teen celebrity that got pregnant.

We can't sit around making snide remarks about the girls who have sex, calling them stupid and worse, then expect them to react properly when they end up pregnant. If we value all babies, then we simply should celebrate each and every pregnancy.

My cousin had a baby at 14. It wasn't the end of any world, but it was definitely the beginning of one.

angelatc
04-04-2008, 05:24 PM
I believe that the death penalty should exist for the reason the founders used it. You get your appeals for 5 years, then die because it's that or the people will have to pay for your crime your entire life.

There ae a lot of innocent people who would have died using that plan.

nate895
04-04-2008, 05:26 PM
Having once been a girl, I think the problem also stems from the fact that people do not celebrate all babies. The Christian right were freaking mean to that teen celebrity that got pregnant.

We can't sit around making snide remarks about the girls who have sex, calling them stupid and worse, then expect them to react properly when they end up pregnant. If we value all babies, then we simply should celebrate each and every pregnancy.

My cousin had a baby at 14. It wasn't the end of any world, but it was definitely the beginning of one.

I celebrate all life myself. While I didn't like my cousin knocked up some girl when he was 17, I still celebrated the arrival of a new life, you just don't say you're proud of the action that happened for it to get here.

angelatc
04-04-2008, 05:26 PM
Would the society have condemned her for being pregnant at 14? I'm not saying it's anyone's fault but living in a judgemental society can stop you from taking reasonable actions.

Bingo.

nate895
04-04-2008, 05:27 PM
There ae a lot of innocent people who would have died using that plan.

Beyond reasonable doubt. A lot of innocent people will be locked up behind bars for the rest of their natural life under your plan.

Kraig
04-04-2008, 05:31 PM
We can't sit around making snide remarks about the girls who have sex, calling them stupid and worse, then expect them to react properly when they end up pregnant. If we value all babies, then we simply should celebrate each and every pregnancy.

I agree completely. Sex too, should not be treated an act of the man winning and the woman losing.

angelatc
04-04-2008, 05:35 PM
Beyond reasonable doubt. A lot of innocent people will be locked up behind bars for the rest of their natural life under your plan.

Not after they're eventually aquitted.

Again, lots of people have died even though they were found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

I do not want the government to have the power to kill me. Not when I am young, not when I am old, not when I am sick, not when I am crazy, and not even if I am evil.

nate895
04-04-2008, 05:40 PM
Not after they're eventually aquitted.

Again, lots of people have died even though they were found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

I do not want the government to have the power to kill me. Not when I am young, not when I am old, not when I am sick, not when I am crazy, and not even if I am evil.

What if they are never acquitted? To me, one year in prison is an injustice for an innocent man just as much as killing him. They are both very evil and it should never happened, but it will, we are only human.

SeanEdwards
04-04-2008, 06:23 PM
What if they are never acquitted? To me, one year in prison is an injustice for an innocent man just as much as killing him. They are both very evil and it should never happened, but it will, we are only human.

I have thought for awhile that the predominant attitudes toward criminal punishment in American society to be very bizarre. The courts, and presumably most people, regard any form of corporal punishment as cruel and unusual and therefore not permitted. Yet, they see nothing cruel or unusual about imprisoning a being that should be free, inside a tiny cage for years or decades at a time.

I know personally, that if I ever had to choose between a year in a cage, or say, 15 lashes with a cane, I'd probably choose the caning. To me, the year imprisonment is much more unusual and cruel than the comparatively brief physical discomfort.

In regards to the death penalty, I don't really have a philosophical problem with it, as long as the determination of such a punishment can only ever be reached by a jury of the peers of the accused. Individuals do have the right to kill in their self-defense (imo), and so the same right should extend to the collective society as embodied in the jury.

GunnyFreedom
04-04-2008, 06:23 PM
I think we need to consider how equality under the law is balanced in the responsibility for children. Certainly a woman is responsible for the wellbeing of her child. It bothers me the man only has to impregnate and write a check every now and then.

Without regard for her, or potential children, he engaged in an act with this woman who put her in this position. Yes, punish her- but I fail to see how justice is served if nothing happens to him. The whole of our laws is to correct the natural order of might makes right. This is why I may not steal from you or violate your rights, even though I have the physical capacity to do so. What is there to check a man's ability to engage in a predatory reproductive strategy, simply because he has the physical capacity to do so?

Im still thinking this through, you cant and should not force people into commitments to each other by law, but certainly we ought to be legally responsible for the life we create- for who else is responsible if the parents are not?

I don't disagree, except to say that this goes hand-in-hand with the modern feminist concept that men should have no input on the abortion question. One of the major reasons -- albeit through a pretty complex and convoluted process -- I think society gives men so little culpability in the childbearing and raising question, has a lot to do with society believing that men should have no input stake or claim in the abortion question.

The two questions are really the same fundamental issue: if a man is 50% responsible for creating the life, should he not likewise be responsible for the security of said life?

You can't on the one hand say that men deserve to have no input on the abortion debate, and then on the other hand say that the father should be held at least partly responsible for the death of this child. If he IS to be held at least partly responsible for the death of this child, then he should have been allowed at the table for the abortion debate.

Just my 50 cents (adjusted for inflation)

nate895
04-04-2008, 06:24 PM
I have thought for awhile that the predominant attitudes toward criminal punishment in American society to be very bizarre. The courts, and presumably most people, regard any form of corporal punishment as cruel and unusual and therefore not permitted. Yet, they see nothing cruel or unusual about imprisoning a being that should be free, inside a tiny cage for years or decades at a time.

I know personally, that if I ever had to choose between a year in a cage, or say, 15 lashes with a cane, I'd probably choose the caning. To me, the year imprisonment is much more unusual and cruel than the comparatively brief physical discomfort.

In regards to the death penalty, I don't really have a philosophical problem with it, as long as the determination of such a punishment can only ever be reached by a jury of the peers of the accused. Individuals do have the right to kill in their self-defense (imo), and so the same right should extend to the collective society as embodied in the jury.

That is what the founders believed. I, personally, wouldn't mind seeing a return of the stockades and lashes.

GunnyFreedom
04-04-2008, 06:37 PM
Did the boyfriend kill the baby? (No)
If the girl had wanted an abortion and the father said no, would anyone have listened to him? (No)
Does the boyfriend share responsibility for creating that life? Yes! Let's get back to the point where boys are shamed into doing the right thing when they get a girl pregnant and show a little responsibility. But in this case it appears the girl acted alone, you don't punish the bf for a crime he didn't commit (which was the murder).

Playing devil's advocate here, we punish people for crimes they don't commit all the time. If some guy comes up to me and I let him borrow my car, even if I have no clue what he plans on doing with it, if he uses my car to rob a liquor store, I can be charged not only with accessory before the fact, but with the actual robbery itself. Especially if he murders someone in the process, I can be charged with the murder.

I'm not saying it's right, but that is the way it is.

Mckarnin
04-04-2008, 06:47 PM
No, 14 years old is plenty old enough to understand murder and its consequences. If I had any say in the case, I'd demand the bitch be treated as an adult. I don't think it's a crime deserving of the death penalty, but I do think it deserves jail time, and mandatory sterilization. I think 10-12 years in prison sounds about right.

What are you talking about? Who would get to decide what crimes are worthy of mandatory sterilization and which ones are not? Perhaps murder, perhaps child abuse, perhaps not vaccinating, homeschooling, owning firearms. That is not a can of worms you want to open..forcible deprivation of reproductive ability in the hands of the government...shudder...:eek:

GunnyFreedom
04-04-2008, 06:52 PM
Teenage pregnancy is nothing new of course but when a girl gets pregnant she's treated like a skank whore and condemed. The male however, nothing is said. It's been this way for a long time. Should we encourage teen pregnancy? No. Should we expect that teens will be abstinant because we tell them to be? NO. Think of what you were like as a teen.
I feel that guys can't really empathise with this topic because it will never happen to them unless their own teen daughter gets pregnant.


If we are going to chastise society for not holding a man responsible for impregnating a woman, then we need to let men have a seat at the table for the abortion debate.

If guys can't really empathize with this topic, then how can we expect to hold them responsible for the pregnancy in the first place?

I, for one, believe that men SHOULD be held responsible for making a woman pregnant, but at the same time, this "men can't empathize" or "men don't understand, so they shouldn't have any say in the abortion question" drives me nuts! This smacks of hypocrisy to me.

You can't have it one way when it benefits you, and then turn the same question around 180 degrees the OTHER way because that will benefit you, too.

Either men are held responsible for creating a child, AND they have a place in the abortion debate; OR men have no place in the abortion debate and they are NOT held responsible for creating a child. To say that men must be held responsible for creating a child, but that they have NO place in the abortion debate, is illogical, upside-down, and hypocritical.

I believe that men damn well should be held responsible for creating a life, and that if we are to be consistent, that means they have a place in the abortion debate.

kyleAF
04-04-2008, 07:20 PM
I don't disagree, except to say that this goes hand-in-hand with the modern feminist concept that men should have no input on the abortion question. One of the major reasons -- albeit through a pretty complex and convoluted process -- I think society gives men so little culpability in the childbearing and raising question, has a lot to do with society believing that men should have no input stake or claim in the abortion question.

The two questions are really the same fundamental issue: if a man is 50% responsible for creating the life, should he not likewise be responsible for the security of said life?

You can't on the one hand say that men deserve to have no input on the abortion debate, and then on the other hand say that the father should be held at least partly responsible for the death of this child. If he IS to be held at least partly responsible for the death of this child, then he should have been allowed at the table for the abortion debate.

Just my 50 cents (adjusted for inflation)

It seems to me, between just 2 people voting, you're either going to arrive at a perfect consensus or a perfect split decision...

It wouldn't change a thing to let the guy have an actual say in the matter, unless the guy's opinion takes precedence, but that's not right, since he really isn't as vested in it as the woman, IMO (I think this is demonstrable: ~9 minutes to inseminate vs. ~9 months to gestate).

.....


Someone mentioned no "rational distinction" between killing a baby inside and outside of the womb. Then someone mentioned the "rational distinction" of partial and complete dependence on the woman, whereupon this was acknowledged as true. I consider this to be a potential rational difference between an abortion and a murder, though I don't agree with it.

Instead, the way I see it is this: life is not sacred in all cases. Unless you are a plant, you thrive on death. (It may even be argued that autotrophic plants do, too, since they require decomposed organic material in addition to light). Your food certainly doesn't keep on living when you eat it...you must kill to survive. That's just the way that life works, or its nature... it's not good or evil per se.

So, life itself is not sacred. Only life more specifically defined can be. So one might say that human life is sacred, or that life as a whole or the complete biosphere is sacred, but any given life within it is part of the cycle which must include death.

Where am I going with this? I think the real question is: what defines "human" life? What makes "human" life different from any other animal life? Some will say the "soul", but I will say the "mind" (which I consider to be equivalent). By my reasoning, it is only when the capacity for human thought (high level, conceptual) has been developed that the life becomes human, and should be afforded all sacred rights accordingly. Before that, I see no distinction between the cells and any other life form.

Granted, this is a little philosophically complicated, and probably over the heads of most kids coming up through the public school system, whose knowledge base stops at pop culture. Still, it is a reasonable distinction.

So, yes, life begins at conception, but "life" in and of itself is not the point. "Human life" is the point, so the real argument is: when does that specifically begin? The argument then becomes a theological vs. scientific argument... i.e. soul-at-conception vs. cognitive development sometime within the later part of the first trimester.

So by my reasoning, there is no appropriate distinction between a partial-birth, or late-term abortion and a post-birth murder. But there is a distinction between an early termination---say with the morning after pill, or the 2 week-later "oh, crap!" moment---and a post-birth murder.

That's my 2 cents.

.....

I don't excuse her actions in any way. A fully developed baby is a human life, and to end it is murder. That much is true no matter what influence society or whatnot may have had.

Theocrat
04-04-2008, 07:30 PM
The reason im putting this in politics is do you think this girl deserves death for this? Lowest form of scum possible, right down there with the people that roast puppies alive on the grill for fun.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080404/ap_on_re_us/bathroom_baby

BAYTOWN, Texas - A 14-year-old girl gave birth in a restroom at her junior high, and the baby boy cried once before she tried to flush him down the toilet, killing him, officials said Thursday.
ADVERTISEMENT

An autopsy confirmed the baby was alive when born Wednesday at Cedar Bayou Junior High in Baytown, near Houston. The boy was probably full term and cried before the mother, an eighth-grader, tried to flush him, said police Lt. Eric Freed.

The mother was taken to a hospital. People who knew her at school said she wore baggy clothing, and nobody suspected she was pregnant, The Houston Chronicle reported Thursday.

School officials learned of her pregnancy when another student who was in the restroom while the eighth-grader was in labor went to ask the school nurse for help, said Kathy Clausen, spokeswoman for Baytown's Goose Creek school district.

The nurse and an assistant principal ran to the bathroom, discovered the girl had given birth and called 911.

Authorities have not announced what charges the girl will face, if any. Killing an infant is a capital crime in Texas, but 14-year-olds are too young to be eligible for the death penalty, said Geoffrey Corn, an assistant professor at South Texas College of Law.

The infant died just three days after another 14-year-old girl delivered a stillborn fetus in the bathroom of an airplane on her way back to Houston from a middle-school field trip.

Baytown is about 25 miles east of Houston.

Yes, she deserves the death penalty. If she was grown enough to have the baby and kill it, then she's grown enough to be capitally punished for such a malicious crime as the murder of an innocent life. The same also applies to abortionists and mothers who get abortions.

Patriot123
04-04-2008, 07:45 PM
Oh please... The person is fourteen. If you were in this situation; scared, not knowing what to do, scared of the consequences, you all would have likely done the same exact thing. You can't just expect a child who probably has family problems to openly announce that their pregnant and have a blast. My G-d... And people are actually wishing for this person to "die." My G-d...

SeanEdwards
04-04-2008, 07:46 PM
By my reasoning, it is only when the capacity for human thought (high level, conceptual) has been developed that the life becomes human, and should be afforded all sacred rights accordingly. Before that, I see no distinction between the cells and any other life form.


Does that mean that you think mentally retarded people do not have human rights?

SeanEdwards
04-04-2008, 07:49 PM
Oh please... The person is fourteen. If you were in this situation; scared, not knowing what to do, scared of the consequences, you all would have likely done the same exact thing. You can't just expect a child who probably has family problems to openly announce that their pregnant and have a blast. My G-d... And people are actually wishing for this person to "die." My G-d...

I knew flushing a baby down a toilet was not acceptable when I was 14.

I bet you did too.

amy31416
04-04-2008, 07:50 PM
Yes, she deserves the death penalty. If she was grown enough to have the baby and kill it, then she's grown enough to be capitally punished for such a malicious crime as the murder of an innocent life. The same also applies to abortionists and mothers who get abortions.

Okay then, you get to be the one who looks into her eyes and slices her neck, without even allowing her any explanation. None of this wussy, "let the government do it" business.

banjojambo9
04-04-2008, 07:51 PM
Originally Posted by kyleAF
By my reasoning, it is only when the capacity for human thought (high level, conceptual) has been developed that the life becomes human, and should be afforded all sacred rights accordingly. Before that, I see no distinction between the cells and any other life form. all we can hope for is that you are never in a position to use your reasoning on any other humans

allyinoh
04-04-2008, 07:52 PM
Well I've had a hard upbringing, I'm 24, however if I go out and kill someone, that would be okay for some of you right because, of my upbringing...?

Whatever the reason doesn't change the fact that it's murder unless it was self defense.

GunnyFreedom
04-04-2008, 07:52 PM
It seems to me, between just 2 people voting, you're either going to arrive at a perfect consensus or a perfect split decision...

It wouldn't change a thing to let the guy have an actual say in the matter, unless the guy's opinion takes precedence, but that's not right, since he really isn't as vested in it as the woman, IMO (I think this is demonstrable: ~9 minutes to inseminate vs. ~9 months to gestate).

9 minutes!!! :eek: You have my deepest sympathies. (j/k)

Don't forget the 18 years of skimping and saving to put them through college. You will never convince me that making, bearing, and raising a child is not a wholly EQUAL affair. sorry. In most cases, the father foots > 80% of the bills incurred by a child.

I'm not saying this as any kind of justification, and indeed the cases where the father abdicates responsibility, his financial impact is usually minimal. But if you are going to bring up the man's 90 minutes of labor to create the child vs the woman's 9 months of labor to bear the child, then don't forget the man's 18 years of labor to support the child.

Yes, there are exceptions to the rule. In some cases the mother is rich and the father is poor; but in the vast majority of cases it is the father providing the overwhelming degree of financial support.

Again, I'm not trying to say that financial support means that the man should have *more* of a voice in the process than a woman, I am saying that they are EQUAL, and every example someone can provide to show they should be unequal, can be countered with another example to refute it.

allyinoh
04-04-2008, 07:53 PM
I knew flushing a baby down a toilet was not acceptable when I was 14.

I bet you did too.

exactly.

banjojambo9
04-04-2008, 07:54 PM
My children were born at 25 weeks they had personalities already ask any nicu nurse

american.swan
04-04-2008, 07:59 PM
Anybody that is capable of doing this scares the hell out of me. No death penalty,but she should go to prison for the rest of her natural life.

She needs to spend some time in jail, but isn't she old enough to learn a lesson. She isn't exactly a rapist, so she isn't exactly a threat to society. I think she needs some help. Some jail time. Maybe a better home situation because her parents obviously didn't give the impression that she would be accepted as a member of the family no matter what stupid, idiotic mistakes she made.

I just think she should have a chance to get out and be a normal member of society again. She is only 14 right? she has a lot to learn.

american.swan
04-04-2008, 08:05 PM
I knew flushing a baby down a toilet was not acceptable when I was 14.

I bet you did too.

Good point. But the mistake here is getting pregnant in the first place. That is the problem she was dealing with. She went crazy because she wanted to cover up the FIRST mistake...covering up just makes more mistakes. You have to keep lying to cover up the first lie.

CMoore
04-04-2008, 09:33 PM
The boyfriend nor the parents killed the baby so someone tell me what we would charge them with?

I also find it funny that a girl murders a baby and people are blaming the Baptist church. Give me a break!

The fact is that she took the RIGHT TO LIFE away from another human being. She deserves to rot in jail the rest of her life and think about what she did. She's old enough to understand the consequences of her actions.

Sexual Assault. I would charge the father of the child with sexual assault. In Texas, sex with a child under 14 is by definition sexual assault. In other words, a child under 14 is legally incapable of consenting to sex. Depending on when her birthday is, she may very well have been only 13 when she became pregnant.

It really disturbs me that this young woman who is likely the victim of a crime herself is made to bear the entire burden of this matter. The attitude of some of the posters here (mostly male, of course) is very disturbing. What are young, vulnerable women to do? The deck is stacked against them and they get no sympathy at all.

kyleAF
04-04-2008, 09:48 PM
Does that mean that you think mentally retarded people do not have human rights?

No, that's not what I'm implying. There's a difference between the capacity for conceptual thought and the existence of it. If a person is born with only the motor-function portion of the brain, then they were born with a brain on a lower order than, say, a lizard.

I would argue that someone in a vegetative state due to systemic brain damage (like Terri Schiavo) can be allowed to die, too.

Someone who just doesn't use the capacity in a socially normal manner (retarded, autistic, etc) is still human.

Again, I'm starting by throwing out the "life at conception" idea, since I'm discounting the religious "soul". That's the premise, which you may agree or disagree with, but the rest is an alternative way of looking at things.

kyleAF
04-04-2008, 09:51 PM
Originally Posted by kyleAF
By my reasoning, it is only when the capacity for human thought (high level, conceptual) has been developed that the life becomes human, and should be afforded all sacred rights accordingly. Before that, I see no distinction between the cells and any other life form.
all we can hope for is that you are never in a position to use your reasoning on any other humans

If you understand what I wrote, you'd understand that your response misses the point. I said "human life is sacred". I only argued for a reasonable definition of acceptable abortion, which would be sometime during the first portion of the first trimester.

Basically, I'm arguing for more restrictions on abortion (no partial birth, for instance), but not complete restrictions (morning after pill, for instance).

kyleAF
04-04-2008, 10:02 PM
9 minutes!!! :eek: You have my deepest sympathies. (j/k)

Don't forget the 18 years of skimping and saving to put them through college. You will never convince me that making, bearing, and raising a child is not a wholly EQUAL affair. sorry. In most cases, the father foots > 80% of the bills incurred by a child.

I'm not saying this as any kind of justification, and indeed the cases where the father abdicates responsibility, his financial impact is usually minimal. But if you are going to bring up the man's 90 minutes of labor to create the child vs the woman's 9 months of labor to bear the child, then don't forget the man's 18 years of labor to support the child.

Yes, there are exceptions to the rule. In some cases the mother is rich and the father is poor; but in the vast majority of cases it is the father providing the overwhelming degree of financial support.

Again, I'm not trying to say that financial support means that the man should have *more* of a voice in the process than a woman, I am saying that they are EQUAL, and every example someone can provide to show they should be unequal, can be countered with another example to refute it.

Lol! Subtle inflationary tactics.

Right, I understand the support part, since both are responsible for the upbringing, legally. My main point was that in a 2-voter system, unless someone's vote weighs more, one person may as well do all the voting, since it won't change the outcome. I suppose I'm just in an analytical mindset tonight...

1.
Man: I want you to keep the baby.
Woman: I want to abort the baby.

Yikes! It's a tie! What now?

2.
Man: I want you to keep the baby.
Woman: I'm glad you agree.

Effectively woman's choice anyway.

GunnyFreedom
04-04-2008, 10:11 PM
Sexual Assault. I would charge the father of the child with sexual assault. In Texas, sex with a child under 14 is by definition sexual assault. In other words, a child under 14 is legally incapable of consenting to sex. Depending on when her birthday is, she may very well have been only 13 when she became pregnant.

It really disturbs me that this young woman who is likely the victim of a crime herself is made to bear the entire burden of this matter. The attitude of some of the posters here (mostly male, of course) is very disturbing. What are young, vulnerable women to do? The deck is stacked against them and they get no sympathy at all.

But you say that without knowing the circumstances of what actually happened. Is it possible that this was as the result of an adult man pedophile? sure. It is possible the father was actually younger than her and that she was the aggressor? sure. Point is, NONE OF US KNOWS WHAT HAPPENED. I know I sure don't, and I somehow doubt you are privy to the facts of how she got pregnant either.

You can be disturbed all you want, but to simply assume that this girl is 100% the victim here merely because she happens to have 2 'X' chromosomes is prejudice akin to all the other evil forms of collectivism which we must reject.

What I see in your post is that men are evil, and poor defenseless little women can do no harm. Let us not forget here that this physically mature woman with the capacity for reason tried to flush her newborn baby down a toilet to keep it from crying and revealing her condition!!

GunnyFreedom
04-04-2008, 10:20 PM
Lol! Subtle inflationary tactics.

Um. no. I tossed in a spot of humor, and made it quite clear that I was just kidding. If you mean to imply that I am attempting to sway a debate using dishonest means without relying on the premises and conclusions I am arguing, then you had by-God better back up your claim, because I do not engage in such tactics, and were we not separated by keyboards, Cat5, and fiber optic lines I would show you first hand how deeply offended I am by such asinine accusations.


Right, I understand the support part, since both are responsible for the upbringing, legally. My main point was that in a 2-voter system, unless someone's vote weighs more, one person may as well do all the voting, since it won't change the outcome. I suppose I'm just in an analytical mindset tonight...

Only YOU are talking as if there were only 2 persons involved. The debate I am talking about, should have somewhere in the neighborhood of 6.5 billion persons involved.


1.
Man: I want you to keep the baby.
Woman: I want to abort the baby.

Yikes! It's a tie! What now?

2.
Man: I want you to keep the baby.
Woman: I'm glad you agree.

Effectively woman's choice anyway.

That's YOUR strawman argument. I have nothing to do with such.

Theocrat
04-04-2008, 10:24 PM
Okay then, you get to be the one who looks into her eyes and slices her neck, without even allowing her any explanation. None of this wussy, "let the government do it" business.

Whoa, whoa, whoa! Why are you going off on extremes? I said she deserves to be capitally punished, not unjustly mutilated. Capital punishment is the role of the civil government, not the citizens. When a citizen decides to "capitally punish" someone on his or her own terms, he or she has engaged in "vigilante justice." As a libertarian, I don't believe in vigilante justice (except in some urgent cases, like when there's a teardown of a civil magistrate by some form of domestic or foreign invasion). The civil government has "the power of the sword" over evildoers.

I, as an individual, cannot just slit some girl's throat just because she flushed her baby down a toilet. That would be murder. What I can do is turn her in to the authorities, and they can investigate, interrogate, and hopefully eliminate her as a punishment for her capital offense of murder. After all, the victim has a right to justice being served--a life for a life.

kyleAF
04-04-2008, 10:25 PM
Um. no. I tossed in a spot of humor, and made it quite clear that I was just kidding. If you mean to imply that I am attempting to sway a debate using dishonest means without relying on the premises and conclusions I am arguing, then you had by-God better back up your claim, because I do not engage in such tactics, and were we not separated by keyboards, Cat5, and fiber optic lines I would show you first hand how deeply offended I am by such asinine accusations.



Only YOU are talking as if there were only 2 persons involved. The debate I am talking about, should have somewhere in the neighborhood of 6.5 billion persons involved.



That's YOUR strawman argument. I have nothing to do with such.

Whoa man. Whoa. I know you were joking.

I'm all in humor, too, though apparently not interpreted as such. :rolleyes:

I don't understand the 6.5 billion people thing though? For each abortion question for each couple, everyone on the planet gets involved? I think we aren't referring to the same thing here.

As with anything, every aggregate of Human Action is merely a sum of individual decisions made by individual people. Works for the economy, works for society.

JosephTheLibertarian
04-04-2008, 10:27 PM
How do they know it cried? She didn't want it - what can I say

kyleAF
04-04-2008, 10:30 PM
Whoa, whoa, whoa! Why are you going off on extremes? I said she deserves to be capitally punished, not unjustly mutilated. Capital punishment is the role of the civil government, not the citizens. When a citizen decides to "capitally punish" someone on his or her own terms, he or she has engaged in "vigilante justice." As a libertarian, I don't believe in vigilante justice (except in some urgent cases, like when there's a teardown of a civil magistrate by some form of domestic or foreign invasion). The civil government has "the power of the sword" over evildoers.

I, as an individual, cannot just slit some girl's throat just because she flushed her baby down a toilet. That would be murder. What I can do is turn her in to the authorities, and they can investigate, interrogate, and hopefully eliminate her as a punishment for her capital offense of murder. After all, the victim has a right to justice being served--a life for a life.

An individual must do it, for it is only individuals within society who are capable of action.

JosephTheLibertarian
04-04-2008, 10:34 PM
She's just 14. Death? gheeze. move to Iran

GunnyFreedom
04-04-2008, 10:35 PM
Whoa man. Whoa. I know you were joking.

Then I apologize for getting angry. For the record, just about nothing on this earth pisses me off more than using inflammatory tactics to unreasonably influence a debate. Take for instance John McCain's "rise of Hitler" comment against Ron Paul in that debate. Ron Paul clearly has more self control than I do, because I would have probably slapped McCain right there on the stage.


I'm all in humor, too, though apparently not interpreted as such. :rolleyes:

I don't understand the 6.5 billion people thing though? For each abortion question for each couple, everyone gets involved?

I am saying that the abortion debate is a debate for the whole human race. When does life begin? When does a fetus become a human being and subject to the protections of civil society?

I personally believe that a fetus becomes a human being subject to said protections when it begins circulating it's own blood supply. I believe that because for all creatures, the /nephesh/ (soul) is in the blood. Therefore when a human fetus begins circulating it's own blood, it is fully endowed with a soul, and should be considered a human being and subject to all the protections of civil society.

See? I am here and now engaging in the abortion debate as one of the 6.5 billion human beings on this planet -- not as one of two people considering a specific life.

Theocrat
04-04-2008, 10:37 PM
An individual must do it, for it is only individuals within society who are capable of action.

:eek:

What are you, an anarchist or something?

JosephTheLibertarian
04-04-2008, 10:37 PM
Life begins when you think it does. It's just a matter of opinion. Now you see why I don't think it's a government issue. Politicians just use the issue for political points, they don't give a shit about the issue.

amy31416
04-04-2008, 10:39 PM
Whoa, whoa, whoa! Why are you going off on extremes? I said she deserves to be capitally punished, not unjustly mutilated. Capital punishment is the role of the civil government, not the citizens. When a citizen decides to "capitally punish" someone on his or her own terms, he or she has engaged in "vigilante justice." As a libertarian, I don't believe in vigilante justice (except in some urgent cases, like when there's a teardown of a civil magistrate by some form of domestic or foreign invasion). The civil government has "the power of the sword" over evildoers.

I, as an individual, cannot just slit some girl's throat just because she flushed her baby down a toilet. That would be murder. What I can do is turn her in to the authorities, and they can investigate, interrogate, and hopefully eliminate her as a punishment for her capital offense of murder. After all, the victim has a right to justice being served--a life for a life.

But you already said, in your post, that she deserves the death penalty. No explanation, no trial, no jury. Just kill her. Refer back to your earlier post.

And if that's the way you feel, then you should have the chutzpah to do it yourself and not rely on someone else to do it on a government dime.

You take extremes quite often, it's one way to show the error of absolutism and jumping to conclusions. As I said before, none of us know the circumstances, so to yell from the rooftops "SHE MUST DIE!" or even "SHE'S A VICTIM!" are both false.

I take a little less offense from those who say "she's a victim" because they aren't taking a human life. While they may not be right, you are absolutely in the wrong to call for her death with absolutely zero knowledge of what's gone on in her life.

kyleAF
04-04-2008, 10:39 PM
Then I apologize for getting angry. For the record, just about nothing on this earth pisses me off more than using inflammatory tactics to unreasonably influence a debate. Take for instance John McCain's "rise of Hitler" comment against Ron Paul in that debate. Ron Paul clearly has more self control than I do, because I would have probably slapped McCain right there on the stage.



I am saying that the abortion debate is a debate for the whole human race. When does life begin? When does a fetus become a human being and subject to the protections of civil society?

I personally believe that a fetus becomes a human being subject to said protections when it begins circulating it's own blood supply. I believe that because for all creatures, the /nephesh/ (soul) is in the blood. Therefore when a human fetus begins circulating it's own blood, it is fully endowed with a soul, and should be considered a human being and subject to all the protections of civil society.

See? I am here and now engaging in the abortion debate as one of the 6.5 billion human beings on this planet -- not as one of two people considering a specific life.

I see, the confusion was in the general versus the specific. I've never heard the blood idea before. Interesting.

Theocrat
04-04-2008, 10:40 PM
Life begins when you think it does. It's just a matter of opinion.

QFS (Quoted For Stupidity)

GunnyFreedom
04-04-2008, 10:41 PM
:eek:

What are you, an anarchist or something?

Sounds more like a practicalist than anything. ie - the abortion debate is not a philosophical debate, but a practical matter between a mother and a father. Capitol punishment is not something that a society does, but in the end there is one person with one finger pushing a button or throwing a switch.

I am thinking that for him, any and every debate boils down to the lowest practical action involved.

And from that perspective, he is right: In the end, a society can maybe decide things, but only individuals can actually carry those decisions out.

GunnyFreedom
04-04-2008, 10:42 PM
Life begins when you think it does. It's just a matter of opinion. Now you see why I don't think it's a government issue. Politicians just use the issue for political points, they don't give a shit about the issue.

Heh. So what if I decide that life begins at 40? does that mean anybody 39 and under is free game? ;)

angelatc
04-04-2008, 10:43 PM
What if they are never acquitted? To me, one year in prison is an injustice for an innocent man just as much as killing him. They are both very evil and it should never happened, but it will, we are only human.

Yes, but but if you are aquitted after a year of being dead, you are a stiff.

If you are aquitted after a year of being in prison, you are a plaintiff.

It is far better to be alive in prison than to be dead in the ground. Of course, for the people that share your view and would rather die than be in prison, I'm sure there are ways to accomplish that without government aid programs.

kyleAF
04-04-2008, 10:43 PM
:eek:

What are you, an anarchist or something?

Lol. No, I'm a libertarian. That's why I made that comment: only individuals exist within society, there is no "social entity". That's a classic collectivist notion.

If only individuals exist, then only individuals may act. The sum total of actions may result in a broad social effect, but it is still the sum of individual actions.

The State cannot kill someone without an individual executioner... either to wield the axe, or flip the switch. Some individual does it.

JosephTheLibertarian
04-04-2008, 10:44 PM
QFS (Quoted For Stupidity)

Name calling huh? When life begins is subjective.

Theocrat
04-04-2008, 10:44 PM
But you already said, in your post, that she deserves the death penalty. No explanation, no trial, no jury. Just kill her. Refer back to your earlier post.

And if that's the way you feel, then you should have the chutzpah to do it yourself and not rely on someone else to do it on a government dime.

You take extremes quite often, it's one way to show the error of absolutism and jumping to conclusions. As I said before, none of us know the circumstances, so to yell from the rooftops "SHE MUST DIE!" or even "SHE'S A VICTIM!" are both false.

I take a little less offense from those who say "she's a victim" because they aren't taking a human life. While they may not be right, you are absolutely in the wrong to call for her death with absolutely zero knowledge of what's gone on in her life.

I qualified my statement on why and how she should get the death penalty in the post you most recently quoted me on.

angelatc
04-04-2008, 10:45 PM
I
In regards to the death penalty, I don't really have a philosophical problem with it, as long as the determination of such a punishment can only ever be reached by a jury of the peers of the accused. Individuals do have the right to kill in their self-defense (imo), and so the same right should extend to the collective society as embodied in the jury.

What's the acceptable margin of error?

JosephTheLibertarian
04-04-2008, 10:45 PM
Heh. So what if I decide that life begins at 40? does that mean anybody 39 and under is free game? ;)

Sure. You might not live long though lol

Theocrat
04-04-2008, 10:47 PM
Lol. No, I'm a libertarian. That's why I made that comment: only individuals exist within society, there is no "social entity". That's a classic collectivist notion.

If only individuals exist, then only individuals may act. The sum total of actions may result in a broad social effect, but it is still the sum of individual actions.

The State cannot kill someone without an individual executioner... either to wield the axe, or flip the switch. Some individual does it.

I understand you now. Thanks, and thanks to you, too, GunnyFreedom, for clearing it up for me.

Theocrat
04-04-2008, 10:49 PM
Name calling huh? When life begins is subjective.

I wasn't calling you stupid. What you said was stupid. There's a difference betwixt the two, my friend.

amy31416
04-04-2008, 10:49 PM
I qualified my statement on why and how she should get the death penalty in the post you most recently quoted me on.

Yes. I also read your earlier post which clearly stated that she deserves to die. If that is that case, then you should stand up for it. You implied that you would condemn her to death, despite the fact that you had no other information about the case.

Maybe she does deserve to die, but maybe she doesn't. I don't, you don't, and nobody has any other information on this, but you clearly stated that she should get the death penalty, based on very little information.

And I do have a problem with that.

JosephTheLibertarian
04-04-2008, 10:50 PM
I wasn't calling you stupid. What you said was stupid. There's a difference betwixt the two, my friend.

That's still name calling. How was it stupid? It's all in the mind. And it doesn't really matter in the scheme of things. I don't know how people can try to enforce their beliefs on strangers

kyleAF
04-04-2008, 10:50 PM
Sounds more like a practicalist than anything. ie - the abortion debate is not a philosophical debate, but a practical matter between a mother and a father. Capitol punishment is not something that a society does, but in the end there is one person with one finger pushing a button or throwing a switch.

I am thinking that for him, any and every debate boils down to the lowest practical action involved.

And from that perspective, he is right: In the end, a society can maybe decide things, but only individuals can actually carry those decisions out.

Pretty much, though I think it is still appropriate for a philosophical debate to occur among people. After that, the ultimate choice in any matter is up to the individual, which is self-evident, since there is no such thing as a "collective conscience".

.........

Btw, in case anyone is not fully aware of the economic theories that Ron Paul supports his platform with, it's basically what I've said above. All action is individual action. Human Action in toto, is the sum of all individual action.

Check out www.mises.org for this praxeological idea. It's part of the philosophical underpinning of libertarianism.

angelatc
04-04-2008, 10:50 PM
Good point. But the mistake here is getting pregnant in the first place. That is the problem she was dealing with. She went crazy because she wanted to cover up the FIRST mistake...covering up just makes more mistakes. You have to keep lying to cover up the first lie.

And people spouting hateful rhetoric like this is why she felt compelled to cover up the first mistake. Congratulations.

amy31416
04-04-2008, 10:56 PM
What's the acceptable margin of error?

There is no acceptable margin of error, which is why I'm against the death penalty.

If you value life and believe in free will, then I don't see how you can be for the death penalty. As far as the economics of it, I've read that it costs more to put a person to death than it does to keep them confined. Not really sure if that's the case, but I believe the cost to a society that has a death penalty is greater than anything monetary.

I do know that there are bad people out there, who cannot be rehabilitated, but there is a better way than removing them from existence.

I don't understand how pro-lifers are also pro-death penalty. I guess it's the "innocence" factor, but given the imperfections of our legal system, how the hell can we ever truly determine innocence or guilt in a very imperfect system?

kyleAF
04-04-2008, 10:58 PM
And people spouting hateful rhetoric like this is why she felt compelled to cover up the first mistake. Congratulations.

Addressing the specific circumstances here is limited to conjecture beyond what is revealed in the news story.

The real debate is a general philosophical debate. Anything we say here had no effect on the story we're speaking of after-the-fact.

Theocrat
04-04-2008, 11:02 PM
Yes. I also read your earlier post which clearly stated that she deserves to die. If that is that case, then you should stand up for it. You implied that you would condemn her to death, despite the fact that you had no other information about the case.

Maybe she does deserve to die, but maybe she doesn't. I don't, you don't, and nobody has any other information on this, but you clearly stated that she should get the death penalty, based on very little information.

And I do have a problem with that.

I was answering the question of the thread starter in which he asked,


The reason im putting this in politics is do you think this girl deserves death for this?

I never implied that I would condemn her to death. She did that to herself the moment she took an innocent life and flushed it down the toilet. Obviously, I believe she deserves a fair trial and investigation, but I was answering the question, assuming it was understood she was guilty of murder. That is a capital crime, and therefore, it deserves a capital punishment. Justice has to be served, as in the Biblical principle of an eye for an eye, tooth for tooth, etc.

I hope I've made myself clear. I will admit that it's sad that a 14-year-old girl would do such a thing, but she knew better (or should've known better). Too many times in our justice system we let off guilty offenders for the most petty and bogus excuses when they commit capital crimes. Temporary insanity, depressing childhoods, young age, and repressed memories are some of the lousy ones used in our courts to get criminals off the hook. But I ask, where's the justice for the victims killed? Do they not have rights? Does not their blood cry from the ground for vengeance?

GunnyFreedom
04-04-2008, 11:05 PM
I see, the confusion was in the general versus the specific. I've never heard the blood idea before. Interesting.

Well, I came to the conclusion because I am a believer. I might call myself a "Hebrew Roots Christian" but apparently that monkier has been co-opted by a group of bad people and might lead to a negative connotation. I might call myself a "Messianic Jew" but I only have 1/16th Jewish blood from my mother's father's side, and do not qualify.

The bottom line is, that I am a believer in the Messiah, and I consider the Hebrew scriptures and the Torah as being of equal import to the so-named New Testament. In fact, I don't even separate them so much, but consider the whole book to be a single revelation.

The /nephesh/ (Hebrew for soul, also 'breath') is a slightly different concept than the modern Christian concept of a soul. The Hebrew concept of a soul has to do with the breath of God. ie - God breathed into his nostrils, and man became a living soul.

The soul, then, is that little piece of "God's breath" that is within every one of us.

Genesis 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul(nephesh).

Genesis 9:4 But flesh with the life(nephesh) thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.

Leviticus 17:11-14
[11] For the life(nephesh) of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls(nephesh): for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul(nephesh). [12] Therefore I said unto the children of Israel, No soul(nephesh) of you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger that sojourneth among you eat blood. [13] And whatsoever man there be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, which hunteth and catcheth any beast or fowl that may be eaten; he shall even pour out the blood thereof, and cover it with dust. [14] For it is the life(nephesh) of all flesh; the blood of it is for the life(nephesh) thereof: therefore I said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh: for the life(nephesh) of all flesh is the blood thereof: whosoever eateth it shall be cut off.

And from the renewed covenant:

Acts 15:20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.


And that idea gives the following passage a bit of new meaning too:

John 6:53-54 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

But I by no means seek to generate a religious debate on a political forum, I am just demonstrating how I arrived at my conclusions.

The /nephesh/ is in the blood, therefore when a fetus begins circulating it's own blood, it becomes a living /nephesh/.

Theocrat
04-04-2008, 11:06 PM
That's still name calling. How was it stupid? It's all in the mind. And it doesn't really matter in the scheme of things. I don't know how people can try to enforce their beliefs on strangers

Your comment was stupid on account of "what must be true of what you posted in order to be the case" as well as the logical implications and moral ramifications of what you stated.

amonasro
04-04-2008, 11:24 PM
My question is, did she actually use the argument "I tried to flush the baby" or is the media spinning it that way? Are we actually to believe a fetus would fit down a toilet? That assumption is despicable and insulting to anyone reading it.

Either she willfully murdered her baby or her cognitive skills are severely lacking. I have enough faith in the public education system to know that this eighth-grader probably knew exactly what she was doing.

nate895
04-04-2008, 11:27 PM
My question is, did she actually use the argument "I tried to flush the baby" or is the media spinning it that way? Are we actually to believe a fetus would fit down a toilet? That assumption is despicable and insulting to anyone reading it.

Either she willfully murdered her baby or her cognitive skills are severely lacking. I have enough faith in the public education system to know that this eighth-grader probably knew exactly what she was doing.

I have enough faith that if raised by wolves she knew what she was doing.

allyinoh
04-05-2008, 10:05 AM
Sexual Assault. I would charge the father of the child with sexual assault. In Texas, sex with a child under 14 is by definition sexual assault. In other words, a child under 14 is legally incapable of consenting to sex. Depending on when her birthday is, she may very well have been only 13 when she became pregnant.

It really disturbs me that this young woman who is likely the victim of a crime herself is made to bear the entire burden of this matter. The attitude of some of the posters here (mostly male, of course) is very disturbing. What are young, vulnerable women to do? The deck is stacked against them and they get no sympathy at all.

What about what Ron Paul always talks about, personal responsibility?

If the father is 18 or over then sexual assault would possibly be an avenue to go down, however, what if they father is the same age?

I am a female and I don't feel compassion for her. I'm sorry that she put herself in the situation where she felt theonly choice she had was to kill her baby. She could have went and dropped her baby off at a hospital or police station or let someone know.

She made the choice to have sex. She made the choice to not tell anyone, and she made the choice to kill her baby. This was all on her.

Teen pregnancy in this world nowadays is something that happens all the time. People assume that their parents will freak out on them without knowing what their parents truly feel or how they will react.

We can make excuses all we want however, as I stated before, murder is murder.

CurtisLow
04-05-2008, 10:07 AM
I blame Fox News and there hypnotic suggestions.

Must go drink beer now.......

CMoore
04-05-2008, 12:38 PM
What about what Ron Paul always talks about, personal responsibility?

If the father is 18 or over then sexual assault would possibly be an avenue to go down, however, what if they father is the same age?

I am a female and I don't feel compassion for her. I'm sorry that she put herself in the situation where she felt theonly choice she had was to kill her baby. She could have went and dropped her baby off at a hospital or police station or let someone know.

She made the choice to have sex. She made the choice to not tell anyone, and she made the choice to kill her baby. This was all on her.



Where are you getting this "If the father is over 18....." business?

Read the Texas Penal Code and see what the Texas Legislature says about the matter. See section 22.011 specifically. http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/pe.toc.htm
The people of Texas do not hold a child under 14 personally responsible for having sex and if she does they consider it an "Assaultive" crime. It is not even a sexual crime.

God forbid that I should live in a society envisioned by some of the posters on this forum!! Obviously most Americans feel the same way which may be why Ron Paul is doing so spectacularly in this election. I have listened to the things he says and they sound wonderful to me and I have supported his candidacy and want the kind of country he describes. Then I come here and read how these ideas would be implemented and I realize why most people have a problem with the idea of such an American. I will take what we have any day over what some of the folks here are proposing.

allyinoh
04-05-2008, 12:49 PM
Where are you getting this "If the father is over 18....." business?

Read the Texas Penal Code and see what the Texas Legislature says about the matter. See section 22.011 specifically. http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/pe.toc.htm
The people of Texas do not hold a child under 14 personally responsible for having sex and if she does they consider it an "Assaultive" crime. It is not even a sexual crime.

God forbid that I should live in a society envisioned by some of the posters on this forum!! Obviously most Americans feel the same way which may be why Ron Paul is doing so spectacularly in this election. I have listened to the things he says and they sound wonderful to me and I have supported his candidacy and want the kind of country he describes. Then I come here and read how these ideas would be implemented and I realize why most people have a problem with the idea of such an American. I will take what we have any day over what some of the folks here are proposing.

I got the "If the father is 18 and older" stuff from most laws in every state. Most states if you are 18 (male or female) and older and have sex with someone who is under 18, you can be charged with statutory rape. I don't know of any laws that say two 14 year olds or two 15 year olds can't have sex with each other? People were talking about charging the father of this little baby with something and all I was saying is that if he is 18 or older he could possibly be charged with statutory rape but he's not a guilty party in the girl killing her baby.

I seriously think that you are misunderstanding what I am trying to say. Or possibly I didn't understand what you were saying when you replied to me then I replied to you.

CMoore
04-05-2008, 01:02 PM
I got the "If the father is 18 and older" stuff from most laws in every state. Most states if you are 18 (male or female) and older and have sex with someone who is under 18, you can be charged with statutory rape. I don't know of any laws that say two 14 year olds or two 15 year olds can't have sex with each other? People were talking about charging the father of this little baby with something and all I was saying is that if he is 18 or older he could possibly be charged with statutory rape but he's not a guilty party in the girl killing her baby.

I seriously think that you are misunderstanding what I am trying to say. Or possibly I didn't understand what you were saying when you replied to me then I replied to you.

Since I do not know all of the facts in this case, I can't say for sure, but there is the possibility that this child was only 13 when the child was conceived. If that is the case, then she would certainly be a victim of a crime in Texas and some other states. Can you specifically cite a state whose laws recognize a 13 year old as being old enough to legally consent to sex?

allyinoh
04-05-2008, 01:07 PM
Since I do not know all of the facts in this case, I can't say for sure, but there is the possibility that this child was only 13 when the child was conceived. If that is the case, then she would certainly be a victim of a crime in Texas and some other states. Can you specifically cite a state whose laws recognize a 13 year old as being old enough to legally consent to sex?

How are you going to answer my question with a question?

I asked you if you could cite a law that states two 13 year olds (or two children) could not have sex with eachother. You are now asking me to cite a law where it states a 13 year old is legally old enough to consent. You don't answer questions with questions.

We don't know how old the father of this baby is. All I'm saying is that if the girl is 14 and not old enough to consent, and the father turns out to be the same age, he too would be not old enough to consent. It's like canceling eachother out. How do you charge a 14 year old boy with a crime if he too would be not old enough to legally consent to sex?

CMoore
04-05-2008, 01:15 PM
How are you going to answer my question with a question?

I asked you if you could cite a law that states two 13 year olds (or two children) could not have sex with eachother. You are now asking me to cite a law where it states a 13 year old is legally old enough to consent. You don't answer questions with questions.

We don't know how old the father of this baby is. All I'm saying is that if the girl is 14 and not old enough to consent, and the father turns out to be the same age, he too would be not old enough to consent. It's like canceling eachother out. How do you charge a 14 year old boy with a crime if he too would be not old enough to legally consent to sex?

In answer to your question see Code of Alabama Section 13A-6-66 and 13A-6-70.http://www.legislature.state.al.us/CodeofAlabama/1975/coatoc.htm

While it does not rise to the level of Rape, Sexual Abuse is a Class C felony. Also bear in mind that this is Alabama law. I mean even Alabama, not exactly a hot bed of enlightenment, would recognize this as a crime.

allyinoh
04-05-2008, 01:18 PM
Okay but what I am saying is this.

Let's say this 14 year old girl was pregnant when she was 13. By law, she is not old enough to legally consent to sex. This doesn't just apply to females, this applies to males as well, anyone who is 13.

So then, let's say her boyfriend is the father of the now deceased baby, he is also 14. He, by law, would not be old enough to legally consent to sex.

So if they are both not old enough to legally consent to sex, how do you charge one and not the other?

nate895
04-05-2008, 01:21 PM
Okay but what I am saying is this.

Let's say this 14 year old girl was pregnant when she was 13. By law, she is not old enough to legally consent to sex. This doesn't just apply to females, this applies to males as well, anyone who is 13.

So then, let's say her boyfriend is the father of the now deceased baby, he is also 14. He, by law, would not be old enough to legally consent to sex.

So if they are both not old enough to legally consent to sex, how do you charge one and not the other?

They almost never charge in those cases. It would be really ridiculous to do so, a waste of prosecutor's time and resources. Most are cash strapped as it is trying real cases.

thuja
04-05-2008, 01:21 PM
with the small amount of information given originally, i am still picturing her in terror. like a wild animal, frghtened by the other people, she destroyed her baby, not really thinking of it as a human life, because of the nine months of fear in her efforts to deny it's existance.
not ustifying what she did, but trying to understand why.

CMoore
04-05-2008, 01:31 PM
Okay but what I am saying is this.

Let's say this 14 year old girl was pregnant when she was 13. By law, she is not old enough to legally consent to sex. This doesn't just apply to females, this applies to males as well, anyone who is 13.

So then, let's say her boyfriend is the father of the now deceased baby, he is also 14. He, by law, would not be old enough to legally consent to sex.

So if they are both not old enough to legally consent to sex, how do you charge one and not the other?


OK. Let's go back to the Texas Law since that is presumably where the act took place. Of course, we don't know for sure, but it is probably safe to guess it took place in Texas.

Quoting from the Texas Penal Code Section 22.011(a)(2)(A)


§ 22.011. SEXUAL ASSAULT. (a) A person commits an
offense if the person:
(2) intentionally or knowingly:
(A) causes the penetration of the anus or sexual
organ of a child by any means;

Now skip down to Texas Penal Code Section 22.011(c)(1) for the definition of "child"


(c) In this section:
(1) "Child" means a person younger than 17 years of age
who is not the spouse of the actor.

OK. With me so far? Good.

The girl can't be charged with the crime because she did not "cause the penetration......."

allyinoh
04-05-2008, 01:33 PM
They almost never charge in those cases. It would be really ridiculous to do so, a waste of prosecutor's time and resources. Most are cash strapped as it is trying real cases.

That's what I was trying to get at.

There's a difference between a 21 year old having sex with a 15 year old and two 13 year olds having sex with each other.

allyinoh
04-05-2008, 01:35 PM
The girl can't be charged with the crime because she did not "cause the penetration......."

So you're saying that there is a double standard in the law?

CMoore
04-05-2008, 01:37 PM
That's what I was trying to get at.

There's a difference between a 21 year old having sex with a 15 year old and two 13 year olds having sex with each other.

But under Texas Law this child was the victim of a crime. That is what is being argued. Whether as a practical matter the DA will charge a 13 year old is not material to whether or not she is a victim as opposed to a criminal. Besides we do not know how old the father is. He may very well have been an adult. Either way, this child under Texas law was still a crime victim.

allyinoh
04-05-2008, 01:41 PM
CMoore, I understand what you are saying BUT if a girl under 17 cannot legally consent to sex then a BOY under the age of 17 cannot legally consent as well.

Okay you know what? I'm not arguing this point anymore because it just occurred to me that arguing this has nothing to do with the OP. The girl killed the baby, no one else did. That's what we should be discussing.

And regardless if she was a "victim" of a sex crime, that doesn't excuse murdering an innocent person who had no part of it.

CMoore
04-05-2008, 01:46 PM
CMoore, I understand what you are saying BUT if a girl under 17 cannot legally consent to sex then a BOY under the age of 17 cannot legally consent as well.

Statutes are construed strictly. You have to look at exactly what the law says. It does not say "have sex" it says "penetration" Until the female figures out a way to effect penetration, she can't be held to have violated the law while the male can. I understand this does not comport with your common sense understanding of things, but it is the law in Texas and most other places.

Kalifornia
04-05-2008, 02:03 PM
While this is a sad event, I cant say that I am shocked. Throughout history, people have killed their babies in all sorts of ways, ranging from accidental to just stupid or downright evil. This girl is 14, and while some kids know whats up when they are 14, others (especially in the last 20 years) seem to have ZERO common sense. Their parents are abdicating the raising of their kids to the state, apparently.

I think the proper solution for this kid is mandatory sterilization and a shit ton of counseling. Locking her up or killing her does no good for anyone.

SeanEdwards
04-05-2008, 02:05 PM
What are you talking about? Who would get to decide what crimes are worthy of mandatory sterilization and which ones are not?


A jury.



Perhaps murder, perhaps child abuse, perhaps not vaccinating, homeschooling, owning firearms. That is not a can of worms you want to open..forcible deprivation of reproductive ability in the hands of the government...shudder...:eek:

I think a jury has the right to deprive someone of their life, so I don't see what the big deal is. These people that murder their children do not need to be breeding ever again. Just my opinion.

LEK
04-05-2008, 04:25 PM
Well, Obama said she shouldn't be "punished with a child".

JosephTheLibertarian
04-05-2008, 04:35 PM
I think the girl should be let off. She made a mistake IMO but it's none of our business. I doubt that she is happy about this

Patriot123
04-05-2008, 04:38 PM
I knew flushing a baby down a toilet was not acceptable when I was 14.

I bet you did too.

Oh, yeah. Mentally unstable people should definitely be given the death penalty for being mentally instable as a child. I totally agree with you :)

nate895
04-05-2008, 04:40 PM
I think the girl should be let off. She made a mistake IMO but it's none of our business. I doubt that she is happy about this

Leave it to the anarcho-libertarian to suggest letting go a murderer and calling it a "mistake." This may have been a "mistake," but if you asked every murderer they'd probably say it was a mistake as well if they knew the judge would let them get by with it. The point being, she obviously, if this is indeed what happened, meant to kill the child, and that is not something you let slide because it is a "mistake."

GunnyFreedom
04-05-2008, 04:53 PM
God forbid that I should live in a society envisioned by some of the posters on this forum!! Obviously most Americans feel the same way which may be why Ron Paul is doing so spectacularly in this election. I have listened to the things he says and they sound wonderful to me and I have supported his candidacy and want the kind of country he describes. Then I come here and read how these ideas would be implemented and I realize why most people have a problem with the idea of such an American. I will take what we have any day over what some of the folks here are proposing.

I'm sorry that it offends you, but most people who follow Ron Paul, and indeed Ron Paul himself believes that all people are created equal, and that all people should be treated equally under the law. If the father was an adult committing statutory rape, then he should be prosecuted for that.

But if the father was 13 years old, then he does not deserve un-equal treatment under the law, just because his genitals are a different shape!

You may be disgusted with us Ron Paul people because we think that all human beings should be treated equally as individuals, regardless of gender. I, however, am disgusted with you because you believe this girl should be relieved from the responsibility of her crimes, and the father charged with crimes even if he is only 12 years old simple because of their respective genders!

So how long until a 40 year old woman can become a serial killer without fear of the law, because she has the protected class of genitals she can never be guilty of a crime? How long before parents kill their male children at birth because just having male genitals alone is a crime?

To say that this woman should not be held accountable for murder because she has an "innie" instead of an "outie" is OBSCENE. To say that if a 13 year old girl seduces and rapes a 12 year old boy, that that boy is guilty of a crime 'just because he is a boy' and that the girl is innocent of a crime 'just because she is a girl' is REPUGNANT.

You think I am disgusting because I believe that all human beings are created equal, and should be treated equally under the law, regardless of race, creed, color, or gender? Well I think you are disgusting because you are disgusted by that very concept.

Prejudice by gender is no better than prejudice by race, and I don't know about anybody else on this board, but I do not want to be associated with bigots of ANY stripe. I am willing to bet, however, that I am in the vast majority here -- amongst men AND women.

If the man who did this committed rape, or statutory rape, then he needs to be prosecuted to the FULLEST extent of the law. If the boy who did this was a child, even younger than she was, and it was consensual, then sorry, they are both equally guilty of the act. Existing law notwithstanding. If the boy who did this was unwilling, and she forced herself on him, then SHE is the one guilty of a crime, regardless of existing law on the books.

Unequal treatment under the law is CRIMINAL no matter WHAT your justification!

american.swan
04-05-2008, 04:55 PM
And people spouting hateful rhetoric like this is why she felt compelled to cover up the first mistake. Congratulations.

I want to restate this so people can understand.

She made a mistake. The mistake was getting pregnant in the first place. The possible or likely "hateful rhetoric" and ridicule from friends and family caused her to hide the pregnancy. She then attempted to kill the child again in an attempt to cover up the original mistake for fear of again ridicule and hateful rhetoric.

I have two sons. I will make it known to them that getting some girl pregnant is not acceptable, but also, if it does happen I am still their loving father.

Question for those who are spouting the hateful rhetoric....if there was no hateful rhetoric in the first place would she have even tried to cover up the pregnancy in the first place?

The source of this problem is nine months ago when she should have felt comfortable telling everyone she was pregnant.

Like I said. She had to keep up the lie and keep lying until she was so pressured to kill the child to hide the original mistake. She did a terrible thing, but we can put the blame for this at the door of the community who scared an impressionable little girl into hiding a mistake.

CMoore
04-05-2008, 04:57 PM
I'm sorry that it offends you, but most people who follow Ron Paul, and indeed Ron Paul himself believes that all people are created equal, and that all people should be treated equally under the law. If the father was an adult committing statutory rape, then he should be prosecuted for that.

But if the father was 13 years old, then he does not deserve un-equal treatment under the law, just because his genitals are a different shape!

You may be disgusted with us Ron Paul people because we think that all human beings should be treated equally as individuals, regardless of gender. I, however, am disgusted with you because you believe this girl should be relieved from the responsibility of her crimes, and the father charged with crimes even if he is only 12 years old simple because of their respective genders!

So how long until a 40 year old woman can become a serial killer without fear of the law, because she has the protected class of genitals she can never be guilty of a crime? How long before parents kill their male children at birth because just having male genitals alone is a crime?

To say that this woman should not be held accountable for murder because she has an "innie" instead of an "outie" is OBSCENE. To say that if a 13 year old girl seduces and rapes a 12 year old boy, that that boy is guilty of a crime 'just because he is a boy' and that the girl is innocent of a crime 'just because she is a girl' is REPUGNANT.

You think I am disgusting because I believe that all human beings are created equal, and should be treated equally under the law, regardless of race, creed, color, or gender? Well I think you are disgusting because you are disgusted by that very concept.

Prejudice by gender is no better than prejudice by race, and I don't know about anybody else on this board, but I do not want to be associated with bigots of ANY stripe. I am willing to bet, however, that I am in the vast majority here -- amongst men AND women.

If the man who did this committed rape, or statutory rape, then he needs to be prosecuted to the FULLEST extent of the law. If the boy who did this was a child, even younger than she was, and it was consensual, then sorry, they are both equally guilty of the act. Existing law notwithstanding. If the boy who did this was unwilling, and she forced herself on him, then SHE is the one guilty of a crime, regardless of existing law on the books.

Unequal treatment under the law is CRIMINAL no matter WHAT your justification!

Great!!!! When you "Ron Paul" people take over and run this country, you can run it according to the ideas posted here. Thank God, it does not look like you will ever have the chance.

GunnyFreedom
04-05-2008, 05:07 PM
Great!!!! When you "Ron Paul" people take over and run this country, you can run it according to the ideas posted here. Thank God, it does not look like you will ever have the chance.

People like you, who believe that different classes by race, sexual orientation, or gender, should be afforded different and unequal treatment under the law, are collectivists; and YOU are source of the problems in this nation. The bottom line is that in a free society all people should be treated equally as individuals, and not one GROUP treated specially over another GROUP merely because of superficial characteristics.

If you are such a collectivist, and specifically a feminist collectivist where you apparently believe that women (as a collective class) should be given special treatment simply because they are women, then why aren't you on Hillary's board instead of here?

Collectivism is the ANTITHESIS of the Ron Paul platform! The fundamental message of Ron Paul is that collectivism in ALL it's forms, is evil!

CMoore
04-05-2008, 05:13 PM
People like you, who believe that different classes by race, sexual orientation, or gender, should be afforded different and unequal treatment under the law, are collectivists; and YOU are source of the problems in this nation. The bottom line is that in a free society all people should be treated equally as individuals, and not one GROUP treated specially over another GROUP merely because of superficial characteristics.

If you are such a collectivist, and specifically a feminist collectivist where you apparently believe that women (as a collective class) should be given special treatment simply because they are women, then why aren't you on Hillary's board instead of here?

Collectivism is the ANTITHESIS of the Ron Paul platform! The fundamental message of Ron Paul is that collectivism in ALL it's forms, is evil!

I mainly support Ron Paul from a Libertarian perspective. I believe in smaller government, Congress should declare war, sound money, end the War on Drugs, and separation of school and state. These ultra conservative, Taliban-like attitudes toward social issues do not appeal to me. I do not see anything in what Dr. Paul says that would condone such. If it does, then fine, you are right, and I have no place here. I will take my chances with the liberals.

GunnyFreedom
04-05-2008, 05:16 PM
I mainly support Ron Paul from a Libertarian perspective. I believe in smaller government, Congress should declare war, sound money, end the War on Drugs, and separation of school and state. These ultra conservative, Taliban-like attitudes toward social issues do not appeal to me. I do not see anything in what Dr. Paul says that would condone such. If it does, then fine, you are right, and I have no place here. I will take my chances with the liberals.

"All human beings should be treated equally under the law" = "ultra conservative, Taliban-like attitudes toward social issues"


WTF???????????????

GunnyFreedom
04-05-2008, 05:19 PM
I mainly support Ron Paul from a Libertarian perspective. I believe in smaller government, Congress should declare war, sound money, end the War on Drugs, and separation of school and state. These ultra conservative, Taliban-like attitudes toward social issues do not appeal to me. I do not see anything in what Dr. Paul says that would condone such. If it does, then fine, you are right, and I have no place here. I will take my chances with the liberals.

Ok ok, let's try a different approach. Please justify for me, WHY the law should treat women as a special, superior, and particularly infallible class of human being?

CMoore
04-05-2008, 08:50 PM
Ok ok, let's try a different approach. Please justify for me, WHY the law should treat women as a special, superior, and particularly infallible class of human being?

Actually I don't have to justify anything to you. I am free to envision the society I wish to live in just as you are. My ideal society would not have 14 year olds giving birth in a bathroom because they are so lost and scared that they have no other alternatives. I don't know exactly how I would achieve this society, but it surely is not what you so-called "Ron Paul people" envision. (In fact I will bet that Ron Paul himself would not want such children as these being put to death either.)
But if these are the type of people who would be running the country and these are the values they espouse, then count me out. I will take my chances with the liberals.

GunnyFreedom
04-05-2008, 10:56 PM
Actually I don't have to justify anything to you. I am free to envision the society I wish to live in just as you are. My ideal society would not have 14 year olds giving birth in a bathroom because they are so lost and scared that they have no other alternatives. I don't know exactly how I would achieve this society, but it surely is not what you so-called "Ron Paul people" envision. (In fact I will bet that Ron Paul himself would not want such children as these being put to death either.)
But if these are the type of people who would be running the country and these are the values they espouse, then count me out. I will take my chances with the liberals.

If you are going to insinuate that I want this child put to death, then quote me. Because I never said it, and I don't think it. Have you even read any of my posts, or are you just assuming that you know what I think because I am a man?

CMoore
04-05-2008, 11:06 PM
If you are going to insinuate that I want this child put to death, then quote me. Because I never said it, and I don't think it. Have you even read any of my posts, or are you just assuming that you know what I think because I am a man?

I am not saying that YOU said she should be put to death. However, many of the posters on this thread DID say she should be put to death and this is what I am talking about.

GunnyFreedom
04-05-2008, 11:36 PM
I am not saying that YOU said she should be put to death. However, many of the posters on this thread DID say she should be put to death and this is what I am talking about.

This whole argument has been about me saying that all human beings deserve equal treatment under the law, and you being disgusted at me because you think that women should be treated special.

It started when you asserted that the girl was the victim and the father was the criminal -- regardless of age or circumstance simply because she is a female and he is a male.

Problem is, that's prejudice, collectivism, and bigotry. NO WAY should a woman be treated different under the law just because she is a woman!!! And if you think that Ron Paul believes in special treatment for certain classes of people, then you are supporting the wrong candidate.

CMoore
04-05-2008, 11:44 PM
This whole argument has been about me saying that all human beings deserve equal treatment under the law, and you being disgusted at me because you think that women should be treated special.

It started when you asserted that the girl was the victim and the father was the criminal -- regardless of age or circumstance simply because she is a female and he is a male.

Problem is, that's prejudice, collectivism, and bigotry. NO WAY should a woman be treated different under the law just because she is a woman!!! And if you think that Ron Paul believes in special treatment for certain classes of people, then you are supporting the wrong candidate.

You are correct. I am supporting the wrong candidate. That is what I have been saying.

It is the LAW OF TEXAS that says she is the victim and the father the criminal, not me.

GunnyFreedom
04-05-2008, 11:51 PM
I have said it before and I will say it again. if we can't win without collectivists and bigots, then we don't need to win -- because that simply means that America doesn't deserve us. Don't let the door hitya! :)

CMoore
04-05-2008, 11:54 PM
I have said it before and I will say it again. if we can't win without collectivists and bigots, then we don't need to win -- because that simply means that America doesn't deserve us. Don't let the door hitya! :)

And so it appears that it will be so. I predicted many months ago that the election would come down to Hillary or RudyMcRomney. Don't know right now if it will be Hillary or not, but it almost certainly will be McCain for the Republicans, so I was right about that.

Enjoy your state of purity and righteousness.

I won't let the door hit me. Good bye.

Pauls' Revere
04-06-2008, 12:04 AM
We are a doomed society...I offically have lost hope for the human race.

Pauls' Revere
04-06-2008, 12:08 AM
BTW a 12 year old gave birth here some time ago. I heard the new grand-parents were elated and were acting as though a pregnant 12 year old is "normal".

GunnyFreedom
04-06-2008, 12:33 AM
BTW a 12 year old gave birth here some time ago. I heard the new grand-parents were elated and were acting as though a pregnant 12 year old is "normal".

Well, on the one hand, parents SHOULD be accepting of their children -- no matter what happens, they are still their children. I actually voted for Alan Keyes in the 2000 primary, and have since learned how he has treated his daughter with personal disapproval. I certainly have no say in how he runs his family business, but I do think that he handled it wrong, and would have otherwise lost my vote if I had not already had Ron Paul to vote for.

On the other hand, I know just what you are talking about -- by over-playing their elation, it send the message that it is OK to become a mother at 12 years old. This is a bad message not merely from a moral perspective, but from a practical aspect also. A 12 year old girl is simply not mature enough to raise a responsible child, quite aside form the questions of her own responsibility.

Now all that having been said, the situation you describe is one whole heck of a lot better than the OP that started the thread; and I would much rather see what you describe than to see something like what started this thread. Neither case is perfect though of course.

Pauls' Revere
04-06-2008, 12:44 AM
Alot of this is lack of personnal responsibility to oneself, others, and society as whole. Lots of guilt here to go around between father, mother, system etc..until we start placing the responsibility on those that do these things this will not end. I speak in generality here as I think these things come about because people assume others will deal with it. Somehow we have become detached from ourselves and how we affect others. (sigh)...live the best you can.

GunnyFreedom
04-06-2008, 12:52 AM
I agree. If there were a lot more personal responsibility, there would be a lot less collectivism and this kind of prejudice.

HollyforRP
04-06-2008, 03:58 AM
Teen pregnancy in this world nowadays is something that happens all the time. People assume that their parents will freak out on them without knowing what their parents truly feel or how they will react.
We can make excuses all we want however, as I stated before, murder is murder.

Teen pregnancy has been around forever except it was common before there were laws for 12 year olds to have babies and it wasn't uncommon to see teens with 3-5 kids.

We try new approaches. One place will raise awareness on contraceptives in school, another school abstinance only. Parents really don't want their teens having sex but it's been going on for a long time.

If anything, teen pregnancy is waaay down in comparison to the 1800's to early 1900's. The difference is, now we get to hear all of these horrible news stories.

Our society tends to go from one extreme to the other.

GunnyFreedom
04-06-2008, 06:08 AM
Hey folks, I want to apologize if I was overly harsh or dismissive of CMoore. I still believe that collectivists are not really part of what we are doing here - being the antithesis of the Ron Paul platform, and I certainly tried to dig all the way down and make absolutely certain that s/he seriously believed that women as a class deserved 'special treatment' over men as a class (a collectivist philosophy) before I encouraged her/him to go packing.

The last thing we need to be doing is sending people on their way who might otherwise support Ron Paul, but at the same time, I think we have to be wary of our movement becoming corrupted along the same lines as the neo-cons have corrupted the GOP. Collectivism is simply not compatible with the concept of individual sovereignty.

Nevertheless, that was the first person I ever sent packing, and while I still feel it was right and necessary, it doesn't mean I feel very good about it.

So, sorry guys.

JosephTheLibertarian
04-06-2008, 12:07 PM
I bet she suffers from low confidence and has really bad parents.

nate895
04-06-2008, 02:28 PM
I bet she suffers from low confidence and has really bad parents.

I think so too. That doesn't mean she didn't know that she was killing a living human.