(no subject)

[trinityvixen]

Update on kitty: Oscar is still a tad pathetic, but he seems a bit more aware and walks about now. He's still dropping his head in his food to eat and drink, but one thing at a time. I am praying he's on the rebound.

*

cagexxx first pointed out the whole "signing statements" fiasco with King George (his words, but eerily accurate), but the last sentence of this news bulletin really drove home for me how abusive the practice had gotten. This just plain isn't fair. I know, I know, what in politics is? But still, this isn't helping his side any even as it hurts every law signed into being. It's kept him from having to veto anything for six years (and then he goes and vetoes one of the few things that both sides of the aisle actually seemed to embrace), so he doesn't look contentious, and it allows the GOP to seem united when they're really not.

Seriously, though, look at this quote!

"An American Bar Association task force issued a report on Monday that said Mr. Bush had flouted the Constitution by issuing 800 signing statements, more than all previous presidents combined."

Hopefully, if challenged within his own party, Georgie-Porgie will listen. Doubtful, but here's hoping.

*

Anyone want to explain to me why this law is a good idea? There's already the drive to complicate matters for women seeking birth control (let alone abortions) by making them feel like sluts and whores and giving pharmacists the right to refuse to fill prescriptions (lest we offend their beliefs with our money-for-contraceptive needs). Let's make it impossible or nearly so for women to have sex without getting pregnant then let's criminalize any good Samaritan who attempts to help them where parents either can or wlll not.

This is why they call these things "slippery slopes." We didn't kick up a fuss about parental notification laws because parents should be informed about when their daughters or their sons' SOs are considering abortions when the girls involved are minors--there are statutory rape laws that make such notification worthwhile, especially if the parents aren't aware of (possible) abuse. Not to mention that it's a good thing to encourage teenagers in difficult situations to turn to their parents for advice and assistance. Promoting that rather than legislating it might have been better.

But in legislating such a thing, how do we combat incest or parental abuse/neglect preventing the girl from getting the treatment she needs? We see all the time that child services folk everywhere are overwhelmed with cases from abusive households, so surely such things as parents not knowing their child is having sex or parents having sex with their children are very possible, and not a few parents who are abusive wouldn't lift a finger to help a girl who got pregnant. So we are to punish those who would then?

This is not the way to stop abortions, anti-abortion people. It really isn't. We don't need the added onus of prosecuting sympathetic family members--note: brothers and sisters are not excluded by this law from prosecution--or, Heaven forfend, sending them to prison for this. We really, really don't.

Comments

[edgehopper.livejournal.com]

Re: Signing Statements - Somehow, I think that if it were the Constitutional crisis Reuters makes it sound like, the ABA would have gotten involved before the 800th of them. The vast majority of them were claims that the specific part of the law was unconstitutional in that President has the power to direct foreign affairs, not Congress. When the courts get involved, I'll start worrying.

Note that the ABA is being more than a little hypocritical here--at least the President has the power to interpret the law. The ABA last year passed a proposal requiring law schools to implement diversity policies in violation of state and federal law in order to remain accredited.

Re: Abortion - It doesn't seem odd to you that the behavior being criminalized here would be considered kidnapping if there wasn't an abortion involved? I can see the Democratic amendments, but Democratic opposition to parental notification bills is the sort of thing that makes Democrats look nutty. The best unintentional commentary on the issue came when Planned Parenthood sponsored an art contest for kids celebrating the right to choose--and required a parental permission slip.

Meanwhile, there are appropriate avenues for children to go through who are being abused. Children who run away from home in that circumstance are certainly troubled, but caring adults should help by getting the state to intervene and arrest the rapist parents, not through secretly smuggling them out of state. For the truly rare and difficult cases, there's always prosecutorial discretion.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

It doesn't seem odd to you that the behavior being criminalized here would be considered kidnapping if there wasn't an abortion involved?

Why is it kidnapping? Kidnapping implies the child was taken against the will of the parents, sure, but also that the child was taken against her will. In the case of asking your sister, aunt, religious representative, next-door neighbor to take you to get an abortion so you don't have to go alone? That's the child asking for tha person's help in going away for a short visit. The girl in question will be lying to her parents as to the reason for the short visit, but that doesn't mean she can't go out and see grandma for the weekend and come back not pregnant.

I would not say it was kidnapping without the abortion, either. If a girl says, "Hey, Uncle Joe, Mom's ignoring the fact that Dad thinks he owns my body, and I need to get away from them for a weekend," she's at worst a runaway. If Uncle Joe, out of the kindness of his heart, puts the child up until she can be safely reclaimed or taken back under his aegis, is not a kidnapper.

And there isn't always the opportunity to interfere with the parents doing it by the book. There just isn't, and it's fairly blase of you to assume that there will always be a way to get the state to fix the problem. Abuse isn't always physical; mental abuse leaves no visible scars and has the added problem of being hard to coax out tales of from the abused--the abused don't realize they don't deserve it. In the same vein, sexual abuse is often misinterpreted as being what the child deserves--Daddy loves him or her, and touching is okay--so the child won't necessarily associate that as being bad. In fact, many children defend the abusive parent because that parent "loves" them.

What's wrong with the caring adult sheltering the child, getting them the help they need out of state and ASAP (in cases where abortion is called for, time is of the essence, so waiting around on the state is not likely to get what the girl wants done in a timely manner) and then calling in the police. When abuse is this rampant, there's the very real possibility that the girl might be injured or killed before being able to get help. It's happened before:

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/07/24/pregnancy_posturing.php

Basically, I'm of the classic mindset that it's better to let ten guilty go free than hang one innocent man. Likewise, I'm in favor of letting some girls with no trust in perfectly normal parents dance across state lines to hide their abortions if it means that one innocent, abused victim doesn't face the no-way-out that scenario this law could enact. Ditto making sure the saving, intervening party not going to jail.

[hslayer.livejournal.com]

I agree, this isn't remotely like kidnapping. (If taking a minor across state lines were automatically kidnapping, a teenager from NJ couldn't drive his teenage friends into NY to hang out for the day.) If it were, this law would be redundant. Instead, it's just bullshit. I can't say why it's a good idea, but it should be pretty obvious why the people trying to pass it think it's a good idea, once you take their mindset into account. The state legislators pass laws to curtail abortion in any way they possibly can, and like-minded federal legislators help make sure those laws aren't circumvented. I'm just wondering at what point the commerce clause DOESN'T apply....

[moonlightalice.livejournal.com]

god, that law is awful. can you imagine? the small percentage of abortion-seeking girls who try and get out of state are probably the same small percentage who can't or won't get parental consent due to abuse (of whatever kind). i remember on my way to the pro-choice march in d.c. they showed a video and it featured a mom and dad who lost their daughter due to a botched abortion. she was too scared to tell them, and her state had parental notification laws, so she got a back alley abortion and died as a result. i don't see how this law protects anyone.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

It scares me to think that going to anyone other than your parents when you have a problem is going to be criminalized period. That's what this boils down to--if you have sex and end up pregnant, no matter the circumstances, it would be legally wrong to get help from anyone other than your parents to fix the problem. That assigns an infallibility to parents that no other section of humanity enjoys and which ample evidence shows they do not universally deserve.

[saikogrrl.livejournal.com]

wah, hope the little tyke pulls through! *hugs*

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

He seems much better after last night. He's eating again, with more of an appetite, and he's a little more playful (when Wally tackles him, he fights back). So, keeping fingers crossed!

[ivy03.livejournal.com]

Look! Somebody else posted a Starbuck set at 1character. I haven't read either for fear of spoilers, but I'm sure yours is better.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

Your loyalty is touching, and I ::heart:: you.

By the by, did you ever finish yours? They repossessed a few characters of late, and I think I lost Riddick. Luckily, I got Starbuck done first because she's awesome.

[ivy03.livejournal.com]

Um....no. It is now in the graveyard of the ten or so stories that I should be working on.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

Right, well, don't feel too bad. Apparently, you can chose it again--with the same 50 prompts, even! The second Starbuck writers have chosen the same set of prompts as I did. I thought once one was done you could chose a different set, but no, apparently it doesn't matter. So they'll still be waiting for you for whenever you want them!