Home > General Discussion > Virginia's very own version of Todd "Legitimate Rape" Akin

Virginia's very own version of Todd "Legitimate Rape" Akin
  • iiandyiiii May 20, 2013 - 2:20 pm #73980 Reply

    Steve, nothing I said about consent, notification, and vaccinations conflicts with the law that you helpfully provided.  I’m not sure what you’re trying to demonstrate- a 12-year old, on her own, can get an abortion, and she can refuse vaccinations- we’ve already established that vaccinations are not even required by law.  So everything I said was correct.

    Are you saying that a 12-year old who was raped by her father should not be allowed to get an abortion?  Or that the doctor should be required to call her father first?

    So you’re incorrect about any inconsistent application of a principle.  And all you’re doing is nitpicking anyway, trying to find the one-in-a-million cases that might show a conflict.  And even with this, you’re failing to show a conflict, by the way.

    novasteve May 20, 2013 - 2:20 pm #73981 Reply

    They incrementally are. You can’t do it all at once. If they aren’t why are they proposing laws after a mass shooting of white suburbanites that wouldn’t even have prevented the crime that motivated them to pass the law? What logic could there behind it other than to slowly get people used to more gun restrictions? Until one day, there are no more rights to restrict.


    Can you explain to me how any of these proposals would have stoped sandy hook? I remind you that he STOLE the guns. Oh, and how did the gun laws protect that gay guy who was killed in greenwich village this weekend? Oh BTW I saw tons of liberals on huffington post once again, hoping, praying that the killer was a southern conservative christian NRA member. And even when presnted with the suspect being Elliot Morales, a career criminal, they still were in their dreamworld that it was some conservative NRA member who did it..

    novasteve May 20, 2013 - 2:23 pm #73982 Reply

    The vast majority of abortions for 12 year old don’t involve incest/rape.


    Do you think it is logical that a 12 year old can get an abortion without even parental notification, while that same child would need parental consent for a life saving medical procedure?

    When I was a kid, my parents once got a phone call from an ER in Florida. My cousin broke his leg. he was 17 at the time, and his mom was out of town and they couldn’t reach his mom, so the hospital called my mom and asked permission if they could treat his injury. a 17 year old needed permission to get a medical problem fixed. but a 12 year old girl can get an abortion like that.

    iiandyiiii May 20, 2013 - 2:24 pm #73983 Reply

    No, (most) Democrats aren’t trying to outlaw guns.  You are wrong, incorrect, inaccurate about this.  Expanding existing background checks to cover gun shows is not unconstitutional, it doesn’t violate anyone’s rights, and it’s not a step towards outlawing guns.

    iiandyiiii May 20, 2013 - 2:27 pm #73984 Reply

    Steve, you have no idea how many abortions for 12-year olds involve rape or incest- you really don’t. I’m not saying I do either, but you’re the one who appears to want to prevent those (however many or few they are) raped 12 year olds from getting abortions if they want one, not me.


    And 12-year olds don’t need parental consent for emergency life-saving care… if a 12-year old shows up at the emergency room bleeding to death, he/she will get treated- the doctors won’t wait to find the parents.  You can’t possibly be serious about stuff like this.    And you were asking about vaccinations- which you were completely wrong about.

    novasteve May 20, 2013 - 2:36 pm #73985 Reply

    When did I say prevent? I was merely pointing out the hypocrisy that a 12 year old girl can get aan abortion without even parental notification, whereas a 12 year old would need parent CONSENT to get a medical problem treated. of course they will not wait to treat for a critical injury, but they will for all non critical injuries. Again, elective, non medically necessary procedure vs. an actual medical problem/emergency, and which one needs consent and which doesnt?

    Captain_Obvious May 20, 2013 - 2:36 pm #73986 Reply

    You troll the huffington post boards too ?  What’s your username there ?  betamanlet?

    iiandyiiii May 20, 2013 - 2:39 pm #73987 Reply

    Most localities also have laws that if the health-care provider has good reason to believe abuse was involved (whether for a pregnancy, broken bones, or some other injury) they are required to inform social services, and may be required to withhold informing the parents.

    But this is stretching the topic pretty thin.  You’re wrong about vaccinations, and one can be a consistent supporter of individual rights, abortion rights, and bodily autonomy rights.

    And I guess you disagree with Obenshain- and you’re now saying that you wouldn’t want to prevent a victimized 12-year old from getting an abortion, so that’s good.

    newty25 May 20, 2013 - 2:48 pm #73989 Reply

    I think steve is advocating that conservatives take away rights from 12 year old girls.

    Great… more conservatives wanting to take away our rights.


    novasteve May 20, 2013 - 2:50 pm #73990 Reply

    newty? Why does a 12 year old girl have a “right” to have an abortion without parental notification  but not a “right” to have a broken leg set without parental consent?

    Hank May 20, 2013 - 2:50 pm #73991 Reply

    Out of curiosity, Steve, does the fact that the vast majority of folks on ArlNow disagree with you on quite a few of your positions ever make you reflect or even reconsider your beliefs?  I’m not saying it should; I mean kudos to you if you have that much confidence in your convictions.  But it doesn’t seem as though you’d be inclined to step back for a moment and consider where you stand on something.

    novasteve May 20, 2013 - 2:51 pm #73992 Reply

    Hank: No. This is acommunity dominated by liberals. So of course I expect as much. Would you change your beliefs if you lived in a conservative community?

    Captain_Obvious May 20, 2013 - 2:51 pm #74003 Reply

    he believes what he believes because HE believes it.  Also, most of his beliefs clearly are the result of other message boards as his comment about the huffington post boards show.

    Anonymous May 20, 2013 - 2:52 pm #74020 Reply

    “Okay, so he has committed an unforgivable sin while we can ignore all the things that democrats do and have done. it only matters when a republican does it. Got it.”

    No, steve. More like YOU want to ignore everything HE did by bringing up other stuff. Which is what you ALWAYS do.

    You want to talk about Democrats? Fine. First you should talk about the subject of the post, which is a Republican and his completely outrageous violation of women’s privacy. We aren’t falling for your standard deflection game.


    iiandyiiii May 20, 2013 - 2:55 pm #74023 Reply

    Steve, why don’t you start another thread about your perceived inconsistency in a 12-year old’s medical rights?  I think we’ve beat this particular horse to death here.

    And getting back to the original topic, I’m curious if you have any worry about the Republican party continuing to put forward candidates with absurd views like Obenshain- knowing that so many men and women are disgusted and repelled by such a law as imprisoning women if they don’t report miscarriages to the police.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.


Subscribe to our mailing list