EDITORIAL: An assault on abortion rights [ Prop 85 ]

San Francisco Chronicle ^ | 10/2/6 | Editor

[SmithL]

PROPOSITION 85 is a deceptive rehash of last year's Proposition 73, the parental-notification act that voters rejected. Under the guise that this is a proposition about child safety and parental rights, its backers are claiming that it's all about keeping parents involved in their children's lives when it comes to making such a decision as difficult as whether or not to have an abortion.

Don't be fooled.

Proposition 73 was a bad idea, and Proposition 85 is still a bad idea. Though the backers have stripped some of the measure's objectionable language -- a phrase that sought to embed wording into the state Constitution that abortion is the "death of an unborn child, a child conceived but not yet born," which critics rightly argued could be a set-up for litigation to outlaw abortion -- this still amounts to an attempt to undermine the state's privacy rights as affirmed by the state Supreme Court.

But let's start with the proposition's broadest conceptual idea: The idea that in the event of a pregnancy, a minor should go to her parents for guidance and support. In some 80 percent of cases, that's exactly what pregnant minors do, and we believe that it's the ideal scenario.

That leaves the other 20 percent of pregnant minors, or the less-than-ideal scenario. These are the most vulnerable girls, the girls who tend to come from family situations that are unhealthy, unaccepting or violent.

As we said in opposing Prop. 73, in cases where one or both parents are vehemently anti-abortion, the notification requirement could be tantamount to a consent requirement.

[sappy]

Proposed legislation called "assault" but killing babies is not?

[linear]

At least they appear to be arguing it out on a State level, and not invoking the accursed "penumbra."

[TexasCajun]

It's always puzzled me why non-breeders are so concerned with reproduction or non-reproduction in their case supporting abortion.?

[ArGee]

That leaves the other 20 percent of pregnant minors, or the less-than-ideal scenario. These are the most vulnerable girls, the girls who tend to come from family situations that are unhealthy, unaccepting or violent.

First, is there any support for that 80/20 thing?

Second, in the scenarios where the children don't go to the parents, if there's a screw up and she has to go to the emergency room, is the group that's fighting this proposition going to foot the bill at the hospital, or are they going to ask the parents to foot the bill - parent's who are not going to have a say in the activity that created the problem?

Shalom.

[King Black Robe]

Proposed legislation called "assault" but killing babies is not?

Apparently. And they are too hard hearted to even notice the hypocrisy of that.

[GOP Poet]

This article is just so full of political rhetoric. In one sentence they sound as if they are sympathetic to the idea of notification. In the next, they spew massive lies about 'young ladies' privacy. Then those sentences lead directly to calling these 'young ladies' minors instead. Then they come from left field once again voicing one of their true evil, political fears of whose privacy will really be violated when they say:

Clearly, this provision holds great potential for anti-abortion zealots to use these statistics to intimidate judges [GOP Poet's emphasis] with the threat of public shame and negative campaigning.

May I also mention they don't use the word choice anymore, but right to privacy. They don't care about the 'minors' or as they call these pregnant minors 'young ladies'-HMMMMM. They only care not to be outflanked and also only about the judges. Because they know those pro-abortion judges are the only reason such wide-spread ability to abort a child at a drop of a hat by anyone exists.

[UncleDick]

Commence the assault! Yes on 85.

[RonF]

So involving parental consent is O.K., as long as we can be sure that the parents will consent. But if the parents won't consent, the right to abortion overrides the right to be a parent to your child?

[longtermmemmory]

girl having abortion is ok.

girl having an aspirin requies three seperate forms filled out in triplicate with a court order from 5 supreme court justices and a two week legal newspaper public notice ad.

[longtermmemmory]

not consent this is MERE NOTICE!

Merely TELLING PARENTS your child is pregnant is anathema to the left.

The left prefers girls seek help from the government not mom and dad.

No post abortion counseling. Just a scared little girl who will feel traumatized and even more alone in the world.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Or the girl gets an abortion without telling her parents, and slips into a spiral of self-destructive behavior, including despression, alcohol and drug abuse, promiscuity (all too familiar, fill in the blanks) and the parents are kept in the dark, wondering what the hell is going on..

Parents aren't supposed to know even about the most drastic, irreversibly destructive things some "doctor" is going to do to their girls; they're just stupposed to deal with the wreckage (and, oh yeah, pay the bills.)

[GOP Poet]

That leaves the other 20 percent of pregnant minors, or the less-than-ideal scenario. These are the most vulnerable girls, the girls who tend to come from family situations that are unhealthy, unaccepting or violent.

This makes is sound as if to carry and birth a child is abuse itself.

So if an 'abusive', or 'unhealthy', or 'unaccepting' [MASSIVE, LIBERAL BARF WORD!]parent does not allow a child to abort the baby, it is abusive. This is one thing they are insinuating. It is somewhat subtle, but still there.

By the way abusive is very subjective to these liberals. I am sure to a liberal an abusive parent is one who will not allow the child to abort the baby--forces the child to have the baby [AS GOD WOULD WITH ALL PREGANT FEMALES. I MIGHT ADD!--Is God abusive, unhealthy, or unaccepting?]

And people who would buy the lack of parental notification otherwise subtly begin to believe this is abuse too without realizing it. They think they are just agreeing that they don't want children to get beat up or emotionally abused. No one wants to see a child be physically, mentally or sexually abused.

This is why pro-abortionists continue to use this exceptional case group as the whole reason to eliminate the right of parental notification. It is a double-edged sword of manipulation, that works as a subtle evil wedge, between holiness and evil. The underlying insinuation once again is so subtle--that to make a child carry a baby is abuse. There you have it.

This is the message all people of my generation and the following generations grew up with (after the boomers). Besides being an inconvenience to women. Many of these minors that grow up to be women find having to birth a child that is unplanned as self abuse or partner abuse (if the other party insists they have it.) What a complete and utter mind fu--. /rant

[Uncle Hal]

Speaking of endorsements, our local paper in Sonoma County, The Press Democrat, endorsed Arnold for Governor. The paper is owned by the NY Times and is very liberal. It will be interesting to see if other liberal papers endorse Arnold. I guess pigs do fly.

[Deo volente]

Or the girl gets an abortion without telling her parents, and slips into a spiral of self-destructive behavior, including depression, alcohol and drug abuse, promiscuity (all too familiar, fill in the blanks) and the parents are kept in the dark, wondering what the hell is going on..

Not to mention the much higher probability of breast cancer down the line, associated with having an abortion at a young age.

[13Sisters76]

Great. Your daughter can't get a tooth drilled without your consent, but she can get an abortion without your knowledge?

[cgk]

the measure's objectionable language -- a phrase that sought to embed wording into the state Constitution that abortion is the "death of an unborn child, a child conceived but not yet born," which critics rightly argued could be a set-up for litigation to outlaw abortion -

Objectionable? Try, FACTUAL.

[cgk]

Pro-Life/Pro-Baby ping!

Please FReepmail me if you would like to be added to, or removed from, the Pro-Life/Pro-Baby ping list...

[azemt]

BTW, any guess as to the percentage of these minors that are pregnant by predatory adult males? How many cases of blatant child sexual abuse are being covered up and abetted by the abortion industry? Does any one seriously think that number is zero? How many cases are *acceptable* to the opponents of this proposition?

Parental/Judicial notification would help uncover and stop at least some of those cases.

[boop]

What would liberals say if an adult helped a minor to get...........cigarettes? What if the girl came from an abusive home and was afraid to tell her parents?