[jwalsh07]

The state also defines "underage" and "age of consent"- they're not born of natural law, or parental discretion. Since it does, it has the power to define special cases of age of consent, such as procuring an abortion.

Spoken like a true statist.

You might not like it, and I've never known a prolifer to let things like truth or the Constitution (specifically, the Tenth Amendment, with the attempts to federalize abortion bans. Do NOT bring up Roe v. Wade- that had nothing to do with the Constitution, regardless of what some Justices say) get in the way of their agenda.

What tenth amendment? You mean the one that didn't obtain in Lawrence v Texas? That tenth amendment? Don't make me laugh. Sodomy is a right but life isn't. Tell the truth now, are you Harry Browne?

[Torie]

Morning after pills, contraception, age of majority, underage, parental permission, parental notification, law, the Constitution, policy; they are all mixed up on this thread in one steaming mass. Moving to the most outstretched limb, do you think there are any circumstances where an underage individual should be allowed to obtain birth control devices or medicine without parental permission?

[TheAngryClam]

Oh really, then?

What do you use as your yardstick of natural law?

"Old enough to bleed is old enough to breed" won't cut it, because then all these so-called minors still would be able to go out and get abortions, much to your consternation.

Likewise, the bar mitzvah and its associated ascent into manhood, is for twelve year olds.

I'd be really curious to know where you find, either physiologically or religiously, support for a "18 or older is better than 12, 14, or 16 or older" argument.