Yep, at 13 she can decide whether to get an abortion or not, but if she's 50 and owns a bar she's not capable of deciding if it's a smoking or non-smoking bar. Welcome the nanny state, where we choose so you don't get to! The left WANTS her to get an abortion, but they don't want her to ever be subjected to second-hand smoke, she won't ever be mature enough to make the decision of exposing herself to second-hand smoke or not. After all, if she's exposed to second-hand smoke she might have a low-abortion-weight fetus.

Wow, Paul, deny and distort, deny and distort.

First, maybe you shouldn't take a reporter's words to be those of the court. Only in the AP report does it say that the court found that she "would not be physically or emotionally harmed by the procedure." That is not a quote from court documents or the judge, and does not appear in any other stories on the subject. But, of course, the court found that, right Paul? The court must seek to find whether there is reason to believe the child will be emotionally or physically harmed. You can find here details of the testimony that led to the court's conclusion.

As far as the girl being responsible enough to make this decision, here are some quotes from the hearing:

Department of Children and Family Services: The Department of Children and Families has the custodial responsibility to do what is in the best interest of the child.
L.G.: I think if I want to make the decision, it's my business and I can do that. It would make no sense to have the baby. I don't think I should have the baby because I'm 13, I'm in a shelter and I can't get a job. DCF would take the baby anyway [but] If I do have it, I'm not going to let them take it.

...

L.G.: Since you guys are supposedly here for the best interest of me, then wouldn't you all look at that fact that it'd be more dangerous for me to have the baby than to have an abortion?
Judge Alvarez: A good point.
OBGYN: At her age and at her stage of gestation ... her risk of death from an abortion procedure is about 1 in 34,000. The risk of death in pregnancy is about 1 in 10,000.

Does that sound like a girl who doesn't know how to make her own decisionhs?

And also, from here:

Juvenile Court Judge Ronald Alvarez last week chastised the state Department of Children and Families for not doing more to prevent the child, identified as L.G. in court papers, from living on the streets and getting pregnant in the first place.

If you had read about this case, Paul, you would also know that the girl got pregnant after she ran away, not while in state custody. You may criticize FL DCF for not being able to keep all of it's wards of the state from running off, but that is not the same as letting them get pregnant while in custody, now is it?

A few other things:

Hillary did not coin the phrase "it takes a village to raise a child", even if she did borrow it for a book title.

How is this a point against so-called "nanny staters"? Troubled juveniles do stupid things like running away and getting pregnant, and therefore the state has failed us? It seems to me that FL DCF is trying to care for a lot of delinquent children who do not have responsible parents. They take on these children because no one else will, of course. But you don't blame the parents, but the state. Good work.

The Roe v. Wade decision so extended the concept of privacy that there can be no restraint upon personal activities.

If minors have full civil rights then parents have none concerning them. Notice that the Constitution does not contain the word parent or discuss any aspect of the family.

By my reading the pedophile next door has a right to associate with your children provided the child thinks that is "fun". The parent is just someone obligated to feed and care for the child.

In other words the USSC has totally blundered. Law professors and legal experts can hedge and bluster but the bottom line is the family has been obiterated in the law.

And BTW, How THE HELL did a 12 year old get pregnant while in state custody?

Exactly. I'm pretty sure 13 is still far below the consenting age in Florida. Somebody is probably guilty of statutory rape, but no one will be prosecuted.

mantis wrote:
Hillary did not coin the phrase "it takes a village to raise a child", even if she did borrow it for a book title.

Who cares whether she invented it or not. She is currently the most vocal advocate of this philosophy who is closest to becoming President.

This and the remainder of your post seems like a lot of anti-Paul kneejerk stuff.

The child is pregnant due to rape. And even if she's allowed to have an abortion if the state doesn't preserve the DNA evidence and go after the rapist, then things are even more screwy than this tragic story has evolved to at this point.

And I'll bet dollar to donuts that the rapist is over 18.

Not to mention that this child is in need of intensive therapy to deal with both the rape and the aftermath of the abortion, particularly indicated by her own testimony that she'd rather her unborn baby dead then given up for adoption.

who said it was rape. u think the girl would've come out and said it was rape?? wtf u dont know anything. she wants an abortion, let her get a friggin abortion. she wants the kid let her keep the kid. and 50 bucks says she wasnt raped, she got pregnant with a boy, IMAGINE THAT, a boy that was her own friggin age

a young girl gets pregnant, thats not always rape idiots. if that was you would u want to have a kid at 13. NOT ME. u want people staring at you at school: ooooooooo thats the chick who had a baby. also its not the states fault the parents were irresponsible and the girl had to be put in state custody, it's the parent's fault. PICTURE THAT but wait, you can't, cause it's all the states fault no matter waht anyone says cause your to stubborn to let people get an abortion if they want one!! by the way, im 13 too.

"The Roe v. Wade decision so extended the concept of privacy that there can be no restraint upon personal activities."

Huh? That's just plain wrong. All kinds of "personal acivities" are illegal. Smoking dope. Riding a motorcycle without a helmet (in most states). And on and on. Have you ever read Roe v. Wade? The reasoning is atrocious, but at least Roe and its progeny are limited to a narrow area of "privacy" -- matters involving sex and procreation.

And where did you get the idea that "the family has been obiterated in the law" because minors have "full civil rights." More nonsense. Minors can't drink, smoke, sign contracts, join the Army, have voluntary sex with someone without their partner committing a felony, and on and on. And parents can still legally spank them without being guilty of assault.

Sheeesh.

Mantis is right. The judge had to make a decision bases on Florida law and the fact presented in the record before him. You can't second-guess that decision based on the glib summary penned by some reporter.

Damn activist judges and their support of civil rights. It's just so....uncivilized!

I don't give a good God-damn how she got pregnant... What the hell does it matter if she
"sounds" like a girl who can make her own decisions.. SHE'S 13 F-ING YEARS OLD!!

Perhaps if she made an argument that "sounds" reasonable to, let's say, chop off one of her arms because she doesn't want to be bothered having to carry it around anymore, she should be granted the right.. Re-god-damn-diculous..

That's some damn fine crop of judges they got in that friggin' state..

Sheesh....

Yeah Manitis--- You can decided she is competent to make this sort of decision by reading 2 quotes from her on the internet.

Man, that is assholic even for you.

If she were so fucking responsible, how did she get knocked up you dumbshit?

WTF mate: In most states, when an underage person has sex, by legal definition this is rape. That's what the phrase "statutory rape" means. Someone under the age of consent, as defined by the particular state, is considered to be legally incapable of granting informed consent (for the same reason that minors can't legally enter into contracts). Ages of consent vary by state, but I'm absolutely certain that 13 is under the age of consent in every state.

As for the moral argument: By her own words, she knows that she is incapable of raising a child at her age and situation. And yet she chose to have sex -- and unprotected sex at that -- anyway. That doesn't sound very mature to me.

Cousin dave- maybe she meant to have protected sex, maybe the condome broke.

what if the girl raped some guy and got pregnant-it ain't right, but u sure as hell know its possible.

And for it to be rape, the boy had to be of age. If they were both under age, then it ain't rape, not even statutory rape.

o and by the way Paul- when she got "knocked up", call it something else brotha, she wasn't responsible in making her own decisions, but now, at 13, she is.

and notice most opposing the judges decisons are guys, im a girl by the way, and Darleen, why should she have to go through school pregnant, when our economy allows her not to?

WTF mate

I sure as hell would suggest you check on the 'age of consent' laws in any state you happen to reside in before meeting up with some 'honey' you think can 'consent' just cuz she (or he) can say "yes."

And I don't know of ANY state in the US that allows 12 y/o to have sex...

Shall we recall that Mary Kay Letourneau was convicted of child rape for schtupping Vili?

And I don't know what weird planet you've been inhabiting lately, but pregnant teens are NOT that unusual in school AND they don't get "stared" at ... and even if they DID, that's a good reason for an abortion???

meshugga

WTF mate

In CA if the boy were over 16 and she was under 13, you can be assured he'd be cooling his heels in juvie while the court decided whether or not to try him as an adult.

I'm of the opinion that it was an adult male that raped her because predators can practically smell runaways.

An abortion is a medical procedure. Yet, Florida law permits a minor to undergo such a medical procedure without having the consent of a parent or legal guardian.

Go figure.

California Penal Code 261.5

(c)Any person who engages in an act of unlawful sexual
intercourse with a minor who is more than three years younger than
the perpetrator is guilty of either a misdemeanor or a felony, and
shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one
year, or by imprisonment in the state prison.

darllen- u aren't reading what im writing, cause if u were u would know that i didn't say someone as old as Mary Kay Letourneau had the legal right to have sex with a 13 year old. I said, maybe u need to turn up the sound sista, that a guy 12, the girl's age, and the girl could legally have sex together. o and by the way, theres not one 12, 13, or any year old girl pregnant in my school. and my school is a public EXTREMLY diverse huge school. and she wasn't friggin raped for the millionth time or she would've said something by now since that would help her case. (getting an abortion because she is so young AND was raped).

A small victory for common sense. Catholic hand-wringing aside, has anybody stopped to consider what kind of MOTHER this irresponsible child would have made to her (taxpayer funded) offspring?

I think the fact that she is having sex at 12 or 13 pretty much indicates she isn't responsible enough to make this decision.

o and by the way, theres not one 12, 13, or any year old girl pregnant in my school. and my school is a public EXTREMLY diverse huge school.

Well well... a middleschooler...

That explains stuff.

Now, listen VERY CAREFULLY. 12 y/o's CANNOT GIVE CONSENT TO SEX. That means even if two 12 y/o's are meeting under the bleechers and practicing what they were taught in health class it is not legal and if discovered, it's going to mean at least a review by juvenile court.

Do you understand that?

I don't care if this runaway was yelling YES YES YES at the top of her lungs ... legally she was raped. Period.

ummmmmm incase you aren't aware of this the decision was already made....
don't get why you're saying she's not responsible enough to make the decison cause she already has.

"Yeah Manitis--- You can decided she is competent to make this sort of decision by reading 2 quotes from her on the internet."

"Man, that is assholic even for you."

Paul, get a grip. Mantis is not saying she is competent based on two quotes. He is saying that you are incompetent based on a newspaper article, and he is right. The person most competent to decide whether she could make this decision is the person with the legal responsibility for doing so -- the judge. He had the opportunity to review the evidence and listen to all the affected parties personally. Your knee-jerk reaction to his decision, based on a superficial newspaper report, really doesn't have any substance.

"A small victory for common sense. Catholic hand-wringing aside, has anybody stopped to consider what kind of MOTHER this irresponsible child would have made to her (taxpayer funded) offspring?"
Posted by: Stuart at May 3, 2005 08:02 PM

God, you libs just don't get it....

What the hell does being Catholic have to do with this? Nice faith-baiting..

A school wouldn't even be able to give her an aspirin without the consent of the parents, but, hell, she wants an abortion, she's got it!

Astounding....

Florida Regulated State permitted under general endorsement of MD, DDS or DC. 877.04; tattooing of minors under age 16 is not legal.

Go figure.

That's not legal under any circumstances. Not legal with parental permission, a note from your doctor, or even when part of some kind of pagan religious ritual. There's no clause for determination of level of maturity, no loopholes, no exceptions. She couldn't even get braces put on her teeth without a signed consent form from a parent or legal guardian. She can't even have her ears pierced without legal consent.

Stuart wrote:
A small victory for common sense. Catholic hand-wringing aside, has anybody stopped to consider what kind of MOTHER this irresponsible child would have made to her (taxpayer funded) offspring?

Typical death-loving eugenicist thinking, equating possible statutory rape and fetal death with common sense. Adoption would never cross the mind of one so indoctrinated.

A lapsed Catholic usually makes the most rabid theophobe, too. They almost never consider that any other religion could proscribe abortion.

Sue,

This and the remainder of your post seems like a lot of anti-Paul kneejerk stuff.

Sure, all those quotes from court proceedings and other pertinent material. They really just held this case to show Paul up.

and Paul,

Yeah Manitis--- You can decided she is competent to make this sort of decision by reading 2 quotes from her on the internet.

Man, that is assholic even for you.

If she were so fucking responsible, how did she get knocked up you dumbshit?

Such enlightened discourse. I read what the girl said in court, which seems to be more than you bothered to do. Sure, it was irresponsible to get knocked up, but at least the girl recognizes that it would be much more irresponsible to have a child at 13. In any case she didn't sound disturbed or delusional (to me or the judge), and therefore was of sound mind to make her own decisions regarding abortion, at least according to Florida law.

As far as your delightful name-calling goes, I may be an asshole, but at least I'm not full of shit too.

I've just read all these comments and wow I'm one scared dad. I've got a 12 year old daughter and I want to lock her up until she is 30.

WTF mate:

You know you don't write like a 13 year old, but you do display the comprehension of an 8th grader. Minors can not give legal consent, its plain and simple (except of course for abortions in some states, but that is something else entirely), if they have sex as a minor it is called statuatory rape. Even if they were both consenting parties during the act, by law it is stilld called statuatory rape. Statuatory rape doesn't have to do with force. Got it, now go back to the shallow end.

Darleen:
And I don't know what weird planet you've been inhabiting lately, but pregnant teens are NOT that unusual in school AND they don't get "stared" at ... and even if they DID, that's a good reason for an abortion???

Where the hell did you go to school? In my 4 years of high school (granted this was about 15 years ago) there was only 1 girl that got pregnant and she was a senior who was only 3 months pregnant when we graduated. And getting stared at is a good reason to have an abortion? That could be the dumbest argument I've ever heard.

J.R. said, "You know you don't write like a 13 year old..."

You're too kind, JR. She does write like a 13 year old and she doesn't understand why things are the way they are or why they should perhaps be different.

The fact that she would prefer to terminate a life rather than give it to a family who would love and care for it shows and immature level of responsibility and selfishness. That same selfishness and immaturity indicated by her decision to have sex without enough regard to the possible consequences. Period.

I can't, for the life of me, understand why people keep defending the right of CHILDREN to have sex and then make excuses that she "made a mistake" and should have the right to abort.

mantis wrote:
Sure, all those quotes from court proceedings and other pertinent material. They really just held this case to show Paul up.

The court proceedings are not pertinent, which makes your post a kneejerk.

Fact: A twelve year old girl got pregnant. If the male who impregnated her was three years older than she was at the time, he's a criminal and she's a crime victim.

Fact: This girl was impregnated while in the care of the state. This means the government is not the all-knowing, all-loving, all-caring entity that socialists (like Hillary and possibly yourself) make it out to be.

Fact: To compound the mistake, the state decided to throw all reason, logic, and common sense out the window by legally classifying the girl as a de facto consenting adult when it comes to her having an abortion, even though she's not legally old enough to consent to sex!

You can site all of the court cases and precedent and all of that other happy bullshit you want, because none of it will make any of this right or good.

If a million people do a stupid thing, it's still a stupid thing. If a million judges rule that a bad thing is good, it's still a bad thing.