Well, I'm a european atheist and here to prove you wrong. At least on the religous part. The other one would depend on what she earnsand how much money she has saved, if she can't affort it the state would jump in, but only then, she'd still have to pay for it otherwise.
Sure, I'm simply saying that since they are paying one bill or the other (abortion or child care), they have the right to decide. I'm very pro-choice and believe people have the right to do what they will to their own body, but not at someone else's expense. In the end, I'm siding with the state unless they are disallowing her to pay for her own abortion.
- - - Updated - - -
Feel free to call it what you want, no one should be forced to undergo procedures they don't want nor lend their body for others. Even for close family.
- - - Updated - - -
Are they even allowed to have sex (outside of conjugal visit)? Allowed or not, the lady is pregnant.
The wise wolf who's pride is her wisdom isn't so sharp as drunk.
How to tell if somebody learned World Geography in school or from SNL:
"GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state give you?
PALIN: They're our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska."
SNL: Can't be Diomede Islands, say her backyard instead.
Warning : Above post may contain snark and/or sarcasm. Try reparsing with the /s argument before replying.
What the world has learned is that America is never more than one election away from losing its goddamned mindMe on Elite : Dangerous | My WoW charactersOriginally Posted by Howard Tayler
An abortion is not a "basic health procedure" it's an elective procedure if carrying the child to term is not harmful to the mother or the child. Besides that, she's incarcerated, so she's lost many rights and that's not even what this is about. She's suing because the state refused to pay for the abortion, not because they wouldn't let her have one.
- - - Updated - - -
She probably should have thought about this before having, what I assume was, unprotected sex. Because from the story, this wasn't a rape case, so getting pregnant was her fault.
That is still not the fault of the sheriff, take a loan or what ever, I question how she would have afforded it any other way? It's not the sheriff's fault that the american healthcare system is utter garbage. And as a guy I'm constantly told that kids are the risk of having sex, in the same way that was the risk she took. If she can't afford it she simply can't. That's the country you live in, sueing someone for an enormous sum is not something I'll support.
Last edited by Cosmic Janitor; 2017-01-16 at 08:47 PM.
I think in the end it would have been better for everyone if they allowed her to get one.. Poor child. hopefully it goes up for adoption and goes to a good family.
Well seeing how those in jail/prison have no rights, except the miranda rights, this is going to go nowhere. It might lead to women that are pregnant and are going to prison must get a abortion.
How to tell if somebody learned World Geography in school or from SNL:
"GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state give you?
PALIN: They're our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska."
SNL: Can't be Diomede Islands, say her backyard instead.
I'm the root of all that is evil, yeah, but you can call me cookie.
It's in basic healthcare here in the netherlands, because we realised that people not wanting children having children costs a metric tonne of money. And an ewual amount of hurt in wasted youth,upbringing etc.
I mean let me just list all the succesfull happy people here that were raised without dads and their mums incarcerated;
End list.
This whole thing is giving some bogus petty tyrant decision making power over another individual, power that he doesn't actually possess. When an individual is in custody their rights still have to be respected and any medical needs they have must be respected. The person in custody is 100% the responsibility of those in a custodial position over that individual - and all of the liabilities that may represent.
Sometimes a person in custody will present with a life threatening emergency. Jailers sometimes ignore their please for assistance. Cha-ching, wrongful death lawsuit, depraved indifference, etc.
See how there's a thing called "depraved indifference"?