What is this world coming to? I don't really understand why people voted "no" on Prop 73 (minor needing parental notification if she wants an abortion). It pisses me off quite frankly. We can't even give a kid a Tylenol in the hospital without parental notification, yet it is not illegal to perform a surgery? That is so completely wrong, no matter which way they try and justify it.
AND, I am sick of the California Nurses Association. There are around 300,000 nurses in this state and the CNA says that they represent all of them. That's such crap! Of all those nurses, only something like 67,000 are actually members of the organization. They DO NOT represent all nurses, or even a majority, and all the things they do in the public's eye are quite embarrassing . I hate unions. I guess that most of California voters like their money being taken away by an organization who does not even support the same views as they themselves do.
There are many more things I could say about the election (California is full of a bunch of morons) but I have a final exam to take.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
hope you get an A+!
I got an A. Yay!
Listen, Arnold wanted no rules for corprate America, so I voted No, No, No, No, No ...
ok, i have an idea. no rules for corporate. no rules for government. no rules for kids (especially those wanting abortions). no rules for minorities. no rules for the impoverished. no rules for immigrants. who does that leave? hmmmm. cool. we're almost there.
kids haven't had a history of shoving coat hangers inside of themselves rather than having to tell their parents they want a tylenol. i went back and forth on 73 and in the end, i only voted for it because of the 48 hour waiting period, not because of the parental notification. if kids need a law to force them to tell their parents they got knocked up, the disconnect between themselves and their parents happened long ago. no legally binding notification will heal those wounds.
theory as to why nothing passed: people couldn't remember which ones were the arnold ones and which ones weren't, so they just voted no on everything.
Your vulgar depiction of an almost unspeakable atrocity does not justify the law. The fact that the relationship between the parent and child has already broken down, does not give the right to another adult to keep vital, crucial, life changing information from a child's parents. And besides that is not necessarily the case. The parent is responsible before God to care for and nurture that child. If the "authorities" add too or condone the distance between the two on the basis that there was already a problem, how stupid is that?
One time we were found out that one of our foster kids had been at a party getting drunk and spending the night with his girlfriend at the age of 15. We weren't told because the other parents didn't want him to get in trouble. Um... yeah. Holding our children accountable for inappropriate behavior is how we teach our children to make better choices in the future.
i wasn't trying to be vulgar, i'm sorry. i think i failed to communicate just how back and forth i am on this issue. i'm very. all your points are good and true, i'm just saying i can see it both ways.
O.K. Sorry my claws came out. But I cannot see how one can be back and forth on this issue. Rape is bad. Abuse is bad. Parental neglect is bad. Teenage rebellion is bad. But I don't think you can fix a bad thing by adding another bad thing to it.
I don't know if you've noticed, but our culture of self has all but severed our consciences completely from our brains. One tiny snip at a time and before you know it we've had a complete moral lobotomy. Is it about abuse? Rape? Neglect? The break down of the family? Dishonesty? Self gratification? Abortion? Bad parenting? Government intrusion? Probably, all of the above. Unfortuanately it, I don't see it being repaired by legislation.
To add on to that add on, parents have a constitutional right to parent their children.
"[I]t cannot now be doubted that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects the fundamental right of parents to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their children." --Troxel v. Granville (530 U.S. 2000, or 120 S.Ct. 2054, or also, 147 L.Ed.2d 49)--
http://www.custodyreform.com/reform-files/reform-mission3.html
The Supreme Court has consistently upheld the rights of parents. Now, I know that currently it is also a constitutional right to have an abortion. However, parental notification does not block that right, whereas a school official taking a child to a doctor who performs an abortion, completely bypassing the parents, does take away "the fundamental right of parents to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their children."
Amen brotha. I mean son. ;)
Adding on to the add on of the first add on, a girl getting an abortion and keeping it a secret to the world is a recipe for serious psychological problems. I think that that danger far outweighs the danger of a girl doing a back alley abortion, since the latter will likely happen much less often than the former.
i'm just gonna back out of this one before i get lynched.
Sorry Nathan. I'll stop tying the noose. I just wanted to convey the reasons why I thought Prop 73 would have been very good.
Post a Comment