Posted on 05/03/2005 7:33:22 AM PDT by areafiftyone
WEST PALM BEACH - A 13-year-old at the center of an abortion fight with the state was given permission Monday to terminate her pregnancy, but it was unclear whether she immediately underwent the procedure.
Attorneys for the girl, known only as L.G. in court papers, said the abortion was scheduled for later Monday. However, the state Department of Children and Families appealed the decision, according to Maxine Williams, one of the teen's attorneys.
"Since this is still in litigation, I can't speak to what's going on in court," DCF spokeswoman Marilyn Munoz said.
Palm Beach Juvenile Judge Ronald Alvarez issued an order last week temporarily stopping the teen, who lives in a state shelter, from having the abortion. DCF argued she was too young and immature to decide for herself and state law prohibited the agency from consenting to an abortion.
Alvarez held up the abortion until a psychological evaluation was completed, but he ruled Monday that the teen would not be physically or emotionally harmed by the abortion.
"Legally speaking, it's not a difficult decision to make," Alvarez was quoted as saying by the South Florida Sun-Sentinel. "Morally speaking, it's a very difficult decision for this court to make. ... But I'm not here to make the moral decision. I'm here to make the legal decisions."
"He ruled that she is competent, that she has made a decision and that she has a right to act on that decision," said Howard Simon, executive director of the Florida branch of the American Civil Liberties Union, which helped represent the girl. The judge also declared "her right to act on that decision is also in her best interest," Simon said.
The teen, who was more than 14 weeks pregnant, has been in DCF care for at least four years.
Her attorneys say Florida law protects a minor's right to choose an abortion.
Florida's high court cited state privacy rights in 1989 when it tossed out a law that would have required parental consent for a minor's abortion.
BTW..."knee jerk emotional reactions without a lot of deep thinking abut this"...I think that is a bit presumptive. I know what hell awaits this girl--do you? I have nothing but marrow-deep thoughts on the issue.
Well, FReegards! I was trying to present an argument, not insult.
So all abortions are bad kids? What about all of the nobel peace prize winners, scientists, moral thinkers, great politicians, wonderful moms and dads or other great people who were cut down when they were at most vulnerable and dependent point in their lives? What about them?
2267 Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.
If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.
Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically non-existent."
Child molesters, serial rapists/murders and other evil are let out of our prison system on a regular basis by stupid judges, juries and parole boards. The Death Penalty is justified until the criteria that the State can protect the citizenry from these evil and vile persons by "real" life imprisonment.
Avoiding war
2307 The fifth commandment forbids the intentional destruction of human life. Because of the evils and injustices that accompany all war, the Church insistently urges everyone to prayer and to action so that the divine Goodness may free us from the ancient bondage of war.105
2308 All citizens and all governments are obliged to work for the avoidance of war.
However, "as long as the danger of war persists and there is no international authority with the necessary competence and power, governments cannot be denied the right of lawful self-defense, once all peace efforts have failed."106
2309 The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. The gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time:
- the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;
- all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;
- there must be serious prospects of success;
- the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modem means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.
These are the traditional elements enumerated in what is called the "just war" doctrine.
The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good.
2310 Public authorities, in this case, have the right and duty to impose on citizens the obligations necessary for national defense.
Those who are sworn to serve their country in the armed forces are servants of the security and freedom of nations. If they carry out their duty honorably, they truly contribute to the common good of the nation and the maintenance of peace.107
2311 Public authorities should make equitable provision for those who for reasons of conscience refuse to bear arms; these are nonetheless obliged to serve the human community in some other way.108
2312 The Church and human reason both assert the permanent validity of the moral law during armed conflict. "The mere fact that war has regrettably broken out does not mean that everything becomes licit between the warring parties."109
2313 Non-combatants, wounded soldiers, and prisoners must be respected and treated humanely.
Actions deliberately contrary to the law of nations and to its universal principles are crimes, as are the orders that command such actions. Blind obedience does not suffice to excuse those who carry them out. Thus the extermination of a people, nation, or ethnic minority must be condemned as a mortal sin. One is morally bound to resist orders that command genocide.
You implied it.
You of course support better pre-school education, better schools, and good access to health care and good nutrition for all our nation's children, so they can reach this potential?
Many a great person has grown up in very harsh and troubling circumstances. They relied on the grace of God and themselves. What about them? Do you want to give them a chance?
Christ was not a pacifist.
its not a puppy. its a baby. good greif, sounds like you have a few. abortions that is.
Have the lunatics taken over the asylum? You have sexual predators running rampant, judges thumbing their noses at the US Congress and starving a woman to death, and now 13 year old girls having abortions. What the hell is going on down there in Florida?
And yet, privacy or not, parents continue to be held legally responsible for just about everything else their kids do.
Because nobody hears them scream or cry while they're being stabbed to death. Simple as that.
So if the State or someone else tries to make or cause you to have an abortion, do you fight for life or "turn the other cheek"?
When genocide and mass graves are filling up do we fight for life or "turn the other cheek"?
When terrorists are smashing planes into buildings killing innocent fellow citizens, do we fight for life or "turn the other cheek"?
When a husband is trying to assist in the suicide of his incapacitated wife (sic), do we fight for life or "turn the other cheek"?
Welcome TROLL, to Free Republic!
I'm sure your stay will be quite brief...
Goverment is now Your Mom and Dad
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.