# No abortion here



## AZ Jim (May 5, 2015)

[h=1]Pregnant 10-year-old rape victim denied abortion in Paraguay[/h]
                            By Anastasia Moloney
  BOGOTA(Thomson Reuters Foundation) - Paraguay's decision to deny a  pregnant 10-year-old girl an abortion after she was allegedly raped by  her stepfather has sparked a national debate over the country's strict  abortion law.


  Paraguay's health minister recently refused a request from the  girl's mother to terminate the pregnancy, but rights groups say the  decision could put the girl's health at risk and is "tantamount to  torture".
  The girl, who cannot be named, is more than five months pregnant.
  In Paraguay, abortion is only allowed when the mother's life is in danger. In all other cases the procedure is a crime.


  The girl's mother has been imprisoned, charged with breaching her duty of care. 
  Health Minister Antonio Barrios told Paraguay's ABC newspaper that doctors and a psychologist were providing care to the girl. 
  "There are no indications that the girl's health is at risk ... we  are not, from any point of view, in favor of terminating a pregnancy,"  Barrios was quoted as saying.
  He said health officials only knew about the girl's case when she  was already more than 20 weeks pregnant after she was brought to  hospital by her mother complaining of stomach pains last month.
  Paraguayan health authorities say even if an abortion were allowed,  they would not go ahead because it could be risky for the girl at such a  late stage in her pregnancy.


  Paraguay's influential Catholic Church has weighed into the debate,  saying human life is sacred and begins at the moment of conception.
  The girl's mother reported last year that her husband was  sexually abusing her daughter but the authorities took no action,  according to local media reports.
  Prosecutors have issued an arrest warrant for the 42-year-old stepfather, who is on the run.
  The case has put a spotlight on the taboo issue of incest in the conservative South American nation. 
  Two births a day occur among girls aged 10 to 14 in  Paraguay, and many are the result of ****** abuse by relatives and  stepfathers, according to the government. 
  Rights group Amnesty International said making the girl continue with the unwanted pregnancy was a form of torture.


  "Forcing this child to carry a baby to term, against her  will, could have devastating health consequences," Guadalupe Marengo,  Amnesty's Americas deputy director said in a statement.
  Complications during pregnancy and childbirth are a leading cause of death for teenage girls.
  In Latin America the risk of maternal death is four times  higher among teenagers under 16 compared to women in their early  twenties, according to the World Health Organization.
  The U.S.-based Center for Reproductive Rights is calling on Paraguay's government to ease the country's tough abortion law. 


  "This is a tragedy and the 10-year-old girl is being put  through this because of draconian laws," said Monica Arango, the rights  group's director for Latin America and the Caribbean.
  "Her reality should spur a serious debate as to the risks  to health and life such abortion laws have," she told the Thomson  Reuters Foundation in a telephone interview.
  Latin America has some of the world's strictest abortion laws, with six countries imposing total bans.


----------



## SeaBreeze (May 5, 2015)

What a shame, sad story.


----------



## Cookie (May 5, 2015)

Awful for the little girl. But isn't 5 months too late anyway? And the Catholic Church seems to dominate the decision.


----------



## Ameriscot (May 5, 2015)

How horrible!  I can't imagine a 10 year old being forced to give birth.


----------



## Shalimar (May 5, 2015)

How appalling! This is a child, not a woman.


----------



## Louis (May 5, 2015)

With all the pain and anguish foisted upon this child...they throw her mother in jail just when the girl needs her most.


----------



## Falcon (May 5, 2015)

There's something wrong when a religion can control a body's welfare.  This poor child should have had an abortion months ago.


----------



## QuickSilver (May 5, 2015)

Not much different that this crap.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/TX...bortion-Rights_Fetus_Misogyny-150505-626.html



> Last week in Texas, a Republican lawmaker proposed an amendment so outrageous, that even some of his own GOP colleagues were repulsed. Andrea Grimes, with RH Reality, reports:Rep. Matt Schaefer (R-Tyler) put forward an amendment that would make it illegal to terminate a pregnancy after 20 weeks, even if a fetus “has a severe and irreversible abnormality,” effectively forcing families with wanted, but unsustainable pregnancies to carry to term at the behest of the state and against the advice of their doctors or their own wishes.​What would cause a lawmaker to want the government to inflict more emotional pain onto an already grieving family, in addition to adding a _major_ health risk to the mother? Does he not realize a woman can easily die of sepsis by carrying a nonviable fetus?Schaefer said that suffering is *“part of the human condition, since sin entered the world.”*​


*

and this isn't Paraquay either...   This is Texas.. 

*​


----------



## AZ Jim (May 5, 2015)

Christian Scientists and Jehovah witnesses let their children die rather than take medical intervention especially blood transfusions.  Talk about first nation idiots.


----------



## Shalimar (May 5, 2015)

I think this schaefer individual hates women.


----------



## QuickSilver (May 5, 2015)

Shalimar said:


> I think this schaefer individual hates women.



Oh no... suffering is part of the human condition.... but only for women I guess.


----------



## Shalimar (May 5, 2015)

Got confused for a minute, Jim. In Canada, First Nation normally refers to Aboriginal peoples. I get your meaning, though.


----------



## AZ Jim (May 5, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> Not much different that this crap.
> 
> http://www.opednews.com/articles/TX...bortion-Rights_Fetus_Misogyny-150505-626.html
> 
> and this isn't Paraquay either...   This is Texas..


We keep electing these religious fanatics.  It's insane.  Hey!  Republicans!  Vote Huckabee!  Hallelujah!!


----------



## Shalimar (May 5, 2015)

QS, perhaps he's one of those blame everything on Eve and that apple that stupid ate. Lol.


----------



## AZ Jim (May 5, 2015)

Shalimar said:


> QS, perhaps he's one of those blame everything on Eve and that apple that stupid ate. Lol.



Eve, Adam, Apples, Mangers, Wise Men, Eden....what a stupid fairy tale.


----------



## Louis (May 5, 2015)

Talking snakes. Ya gotta love a talking snake.


----------



## Shalimar (May 5, 2015)

Louis, the snake is the hero of the fable, IMHO. Definitely the brains of the outfit. I think Eve baby should have hooked up with the serpent, and left stupid to his own devices. Lolnthego:


----------



## Louis (May 5, 2015)

Shalimar said:


> Louis, the snake is the hero of the fable, IMHO. Definitely the brains of the outfit. I think Eve baby should have hooked up with the serpent, and left stupid to his own devices. Lolnthego:


:rofl1:   :cheers:


----------



## BobF (May 5, 2015)

You that are blaming the Republicans for the problems must really mean the Democrats as many of our Italians and Mexicans are religious Catholic Christians and most likely to not allow abortions.


----------



## AZ Jim (May 5, 2015)

Who passes the laws that severely curtail or outlaw abortions?  It's republicans 100%.  Until you and others understand the steep danger of electing religious zealots we can look for even more anti-people legislation.


----------



## BobF (May 5, 2015)

AZ Jim said:


> Who passes the laws that severely curtail or outlaw abortions?  It's republicans 100%.  Until you and others understand the steep danger of electing religious zealots we can look for even more anti-people legislation.



Sorry but thus response is an exaggeration.   It is the Catholics that cause these types of restrictions where ever they can.   The point I made was that those Catholic thinkers of the world that have come to the us are driving the abortion restrictions, more than any other groups are doing.   Some non Catholic groups are also part of the problem.   But no proofs of all those Catholics being in the Republican political party.   All the problems in this country are not created by the Republican party as some seem to think.

In fact, neither the Republican or Democrat parties are to govern the United States.   This is all supposed to done by our Congress and voted from where the Congressmen live, not the overall power of parties like claimed by some.   And the strength of both Republican and Democrat parties themselves is only about 30% for each and that leaves us a larger group, the independents of about 40% who can and do vote their own way.    It is these votes that can and do sway the direction of our elections.


----------



## Falcon (May 5, 2015)

Those writers must have been on something to give them such inspirations.  Almost like eating those funny mushrooms.


----------



## AZ Jim (May 5, 2015)

The most restrictive anti-abortion laws are in these states: Oklahoma, Indiana, S. Carolina, Alabama, Texas, Virgina, Idaho, Pennsylvania, Ohio, S. Dakota, Nebraska, Utah, Kentucky, Missouri, Arkansas, Mississippi, N. Dakota, Louisiana, Kansas. 19 total.  Only three of those states do not have a REPUBLICAN administration.

Get the picture?


----------



## BobF (May 5, 2015)

AZ Jim said:


> The most restrictive anti-abortion laws are in these states: Oklahoma, Indiana, S. Carolina, Alabama, Texas, Virgina, Idaho, Pennsylvania, Ohio, S. Dakota, Nebraska, Utah, Kentucky, Missouri, Arkansas, Mississippi, N. Dakota, Louisiana, Kansas. 19 total.  Only three of those states do not have a REPUBLICAN administration.
> 
> Get the picture?



You are selectively picking points to support your claims.   Try reading what I have posted and then tell me only Republicans are the ones responsible.   There are not enough Republicans or Democrats in this country for either to control how things go.   Neither party has enough to do as some claim.   Democrats are made  up of many Catholics so they also have a bit to say about such items as abortions.


----------



## AZ Jim (May 5, 2015)

Bob are you intentionally trying to avoid being exposed again as absolutely wrong.  The charge that Catholics are somehow responsible is ridiculous because they can only vote if an issue is on a ballot, these restrictive laws come from these governors and legislators.  Wake up.


----------



## QuickSilver (May 5, 2015)

Good grief..  Bob...  we have a separation of Church and state... The Catholics do not pass laws... either State or Federal.


----------



## BobF (May 5, 2015)

Well, if your do not read you will never learn.   Just how will the Republicans or Democrats ever be able to control everything when their total numbers are in the 30% range for each.   Neither party can force that change as you claim.   I am saying that again, neither party can by themselves force that change.   It has to be a mixture of both parties and the independents that make it happen.  

That means that many Catholics will vote that way and many of the non Catholic religions might also.   It has nothing to do with the undermanned political parties alone to accomplish this event.    We really should do away with these political parties and get back to the Constitution and its guide lines for each person to vote as they wish.   Nothing in the Constitution about a political party being in charge.


----------



## AZ Jim (May 5, 2015)

Bob, you just don't seem to get it.  There are no abortion propositions on the ballot.  No catholic or any other religion can vote one way or the other.  Those laws were passed by state administrations.  I told you how many of the restrictive states were administered by republicans.  Come on man, for a change THINK.


----------



## QuickSilver (May 5, 2015)

So how are all these Abortion restrictive laws being passed if not by a political party Bob?   Republicans are passing them..in Red States.   You claim that Hipanics are vastly Catholic... TRUE, they are..  However, they mostly vote Democratic... in fact, Latinos voted for President Obama over Romney 71% to 27%, and are slated to do the same for Clinton.


----------



## AZ Jim (May 5, 2015)

I don't like saying this but it appears that Bob is just not up to these facts.


----------



## BobF (May 5, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> So how are all these Abortion restrictive laws being passed if not by a political party Bob?   Republicans are passing them..in Red States.   You claim that Hipanics are vastly Catholic... TRUE, they are..  However, they mostly vote Democratic... in fact, Latinos voted for President Obama over Romney 71% to 27%, and are slated to do the same for Clinton.



We do not vote in political parties.   We vote in representatives of the people into House and Senate.   Something hard for some to understand and realize.   The political parties love to claim elected to be theirs.  No guarantee at all as most often the votes are by the people.   Even if we did vote in a party neither party has enough people to guarantee their party will win as they wish.   30% for either party is not a majority for either.


----------



## AZ Jim (May 5, 2015)

BobF said:


> We do not vote in political parties.   We vote in representatives of the people into House and Senate.   Something hard for some to understand and realize.   The political parties love to claim elected to be theirs.  No guarantee at all as most often the votes are by the people.   Even if we did vote in a party neither party has enough people to guarantee their party will win as they wish.   30% for either party is not a majority for either.



Ok that does it.  You are just typing  words that make no sense at all.  Have it your way Bob, stumble off thinking you know what you are talking about.  I give up, you reply to hard fact with mumbojumbo.


----------



## BobF (May 5, 2015)

AZ Jim said:


> Bob, you just don't seem to get it.  There are no abortion propositions on the ballot.  No catholic or any other religion can vote one way or the other.  Those laws were passed by state administrations.  I told you how many of the restrictive states were administered by republicans.  Come on man, for a change THINK.



What you don't seem to understand and I have repeated it more than once.   Neither party has a majority.   They both must depend on independents and some from the opposing party to force any vote, not matter what it might be.   The idea of abortions or not are based on the religion teachings and that affects the elected votes.

Personally I would prefer abortions be allowed.   For the women's safety, for population control, to protect from rape results, personal decisions need attention.


----------



## BobF (May 5, 2015)

AZ Jim said:


> Ok that does it.  You are just typing  words that make no sense at all.  Have it your way Bob, stumble off thinking you know what you are talking about.  I give up, you reply to hard fact with mumbojumbo.



My words do make sense, they are not mumbojumbo as you say.   Once the election is over we do not actually control by party, we have Representatives and Senators that do the final decisions.   I feel I know a lot more about what I am saying than some folks that think the political parties are in charge of everything.   Political parties have been changed many times over the years.   Amazing thing is that one time both Democrats and Republicans were hand in hand trying to run this country.


----------



## Warrigal (May 5, 2015)

This thread had gone seriously off track.

Abortion is one issue in the OP but so is the patriarchy of Paraquay. Did people miss the statistic of "_Two births a day occur among girls aged 10 to 14 in  Paraguay, and many are the result of ****** abuse by relatives and  stepfathers, according to the government._"

It is simplistic to think that the answer to this problem is a convenient abortion, especially if the girl is returned to the hands of the same abuser.
There are many issues that need attention - child safety and protection, the status of women, contraception and as last resort, safe early abortions.

I remember years ago that this problem existed and a child as young as four or five became the youngest mother on the record books. This was somewhere in Sth America.


----------



## Cookie (May 5, 2015)

How can a child of 4 or 5 become pregnant? I thought I was familiar with the female reproductive cycle, I must be missing something and better go look it up. 

It's disgusting that the ****** abuse of little children is so prevalent not only in this predominantly Catholic country, but all over the world.


----------



## Warrigal (May 5, 2015)

Cookie said:


> How can a child of 4 or 5 become pregnant? I thought I was familiar with the female reproductive cycle, I must be missing something and better go look it up.
> 
> It's disgusting that the ****** abuse of little children is so prevalent not only in this predominantly Catholic country, but all over the world.



Here is a list of youngest birth mothers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_youngest_birth_mothers

The youngest was 5 and lived in Peru.


----------



## Cookie (May 5, 2015)

How can a child of 4 or 5 become pregnant? I thought I was familiar with the female reproductive cycle, I must be missing something and better go look it up. ... OK looked it up and there are several examples under search 'pregnancy in children'.  There's a condition called 'precocious puberty' where the child's hormones are activated.  Other cases did not have onset of puberty and listed kids as young as 8 who had not even menstruated who were raped and had babies.  

It's truly disgusting that the ****** abuse of little children is so prevalent not only in Paraguay, a predominantly Catholic country, but all over the world.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Aug 16, 2015)

Just read about this comment today on Huffington Post by Huckabee...do not agree with him at all.


----------



## AZ Jim (Aug 16, 2015)

He is a rigid southern Baptist.  I know the brand well.  My Uncle was a devoted SB.  He was absolutely rigid and unalterable.  He eventually forced his children (my cousins) to flee his oft times cruelty (always in the name of god).


----------



## Linda (Aug 17, 2015)

Louis said:


> With all the pain and anguish foisted upon this child...they throw her mother in jail just when the girl needs her most.




I agree with Louis.  Very sad situation.  That poor girl.


----------



## Debby (Aug 17, 2015)

Shalimar said:


> QS, perhaps he's one of those blame everything on Eve and that apple that stupid ate. Lol.




I have always (even when I was in the church) thought that was totally unfair and particularly since the Biblical perspective puts the man at the head!

Like where the hell was Adam when he was supposed to be 'protecting his wife from herself'?  So he screws up, she gets blamed for eternity.  Besides, his own weakness ("she talked me into it God") condemns him and calls into question his right to the 'big chair' doesn't it?

Sorry, off track but I needed to vent on behalf of all women  so back now to the thread.  And yes, it is awful about a ten year old having to give birth!  I can only hope the creep that did this to her has been stopped from ever harming another child.


----------



## AZ Jim (Aug 17, 2015)

That little girl was raped and impregnated by her stepfather.  He should pay by forfeiting his freedom for life.


----------



## BobF (Aug 17, 2015)

And maybe his working tool be shortened to about an inch or so when excited, and the two objects with creation abilities should also go into the garbage.    But most likely none of that will happen.


----------



## Don M. (Aug 17, 2015)

Another aspect of the abortion issue that never seems to garner much attention is the miserable life some of these "unwanted" children have to go through when the mother is denied an abortion.  What good is it to bring a child into the world when that child is Not Wanted...or the parents lack the means, or the will, to raise that child properly?


----------



## Shalimar (Aug 17, 2015)

I might have more respect for the pro life people if so many of them were not really pro birth advocates, who virtually ignore the state of a child's life once it is born. Bizarre.


----------



## Debby (Aug 18, 2015)

SeaBreeze said:


> Just read about this comment today on Huffington Post by Huckabee...do not agree with him at all.




To go along with your video I read this earlier today:'.....Huckabee has taken a firm stance against abortion and suggested last month that he wouldn't rule out using federal troops to stop women from accessing the procedure. He also identifies with a small group of conservative legal scholars who believe the Constitution gives the president the power to outlaw abortion, despite the Supreme Court's many rulings on the matter.....'


and by the way, Mr. Huckabee is a Baptist, not a Catholic.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...5d0a275e4b07addcb433a4a?kvcommref=mostpopular



So there you are, a Baptist Republican who considers calling in the army to shut down abortion clinics and that the President can veto all Supreme Court rulings on this matter (Hmmm, wonder if he figures the same for all Supreme Court rulings?)  Maybe you could change 'President Huckabee's title to 'Emperor'.


----------



## Debby (Aug 18, 2015)

Shalimar said:


> I might have more respect for the pro life people if so many of them were not really pro birth advocates, who virtually ignore the state of a child's life once it is born. Bizarre.





I used to volunteer at a Crisis Pregnancy Centre that was run by a group of church's in the Langley/White Rock area and they actually didn't ignore anyone once babies were born but tried to help them change their circumstances, work,home life, etc. and continued on an individual basis to be in touch with many of the women they saw, by developing relationships with them, or helping them find child care, jobs or invited them into the church family.  Some may disengage after the event, but not all.  And most often, it was the new moms who disengaged from communication at the office I was at.  Once they had settled into their new lives as mothers and family had come around to helping rather than being angry, etc., they very often decided that the close church affiliation wasn't their cup of tea.


----------



## Don M. (Aug 18, 2015)

I'll have some respect for these "Pro Life" positions when I see these people lining up to Adopt the Unwanted Children.  Until then, the Huckabee types are spouting Hypocrisy....IMO.


----------



## Debby (Aug 18, 2015)

How do you know pro-life people aren't adopting when they can?  What kind of experience do you have with people who feel that way, that it's possible to make blanket statements about what they think or feel or what they do?  

Besides, who says the babies are 'unwanted'.  Their mothers obviously want them or they would have gone direct to Planned Parenthood and as well there's an active and healthy adoption 'industry' in the US and there's numerous people who adopt overseas kids.   Maybe inconvenient would be a better word than unwanted.

And maybe with social services supporting and social norms changing, more young girls/women are keeping their children?  Can't exactly wrest children from their parents arms even if they are single teens, etc.  And in looking at domestic adoption, it turns out that the whole process is surprisingly quicker than I first thought and it costs between $30,000 and $50,000 on average.  https://www.adoptivefamilies.com/talking-about-adoption/domestic-adoption-myths-and-truths/

Maybe we should be careful about blanket statements.


----------



## Don M. (Aug 18, 2015)

Maybe we should be careful about blanket statements.[/QUOTE]

I appears that there are over 130,000 children in the U.S. that are having little success in finding a good home.  That "blanket statement" speaks for itself.

http://www.adoptamericanetwork.org/waiting-children/


----------



## Debby (Aug 18, 2015)

Don M. said:


> Maybe we should be careful about blanket statements.



I appears that there are over 130,000 children in the U.S. that are having little success in finding a good home.  That "blanket statement" speaks for itself.

http://www.adoptamericanetwork.org/waiting-children/[/QUOTE]


That is unfortunate and I guess like every other species we humans adopt, we're drawn to the babies rather than older kids with associated problems or even those that have no problems but we have a fear of not bonding with them because they are older. 

But that's not the fault either of pro-life people nor is the homelessness, neglect or outright abuse of those kids the fault of people who believe the way they do.  The state of those kids lives is more likely caused by a lack of opportunities and hope for their parents and so mom and/or dad succumb to the frustration of doing without, living in fear, failure to learn how to parent from their own parents, etc., and their kids pay the price.  Maybe as a conscientious and educated voter, you need to get on your government for their policies that allowed the corporations to abandon their country of origin, for those with even lower wages than these people would require to live a basic but decent life.   

I think because their opinion differs from yours for example, it's easy to target them as being 'evil people'.  But social mores change and evolve and once upon a time, you would have been considered the evil person by the majority.  Does that or would that have made you a bad person, or someone with a different perspective and who thought he had evidence to back it up?

That kind of attitudinal name calling does nothing to solve any problem and doesn't lead to dialogue either.  Change only comes with dialogue and a willingness to at least consider the merits of the other sides argument.  

It seems to me that there are three 'sides' to this discussion.  One is your side, then there's the pro-lifers side, and the aborting 'mothers' side. As a woman, I've had the experience of all three and I can tell you this, it isn't as cut and dried as you would like to think it is.


----------



## Kadee (Aug 18, 2015)

AZ Jim said:


> Christian Scientists and Jehovah witnesses let their children die rather than take medical intervention especially blood transfusions.  Talk about first nation idiots.


Yes Jim I can relate first hand to your post.....you may remember mentioning in a post soon after joining SF.. I was married to a man who joined the JW after we married and insisted I let Jehovah take care of my dying son , who was 6 months old at the time ..he is now a 6 ft tall healthy 41 year old ..I could go on an on but I will bite my tongue or my BP will go throug the roof ..This all happened 40 years ago the thought of it still raises my BP even though the ex passed away a long time ago ..


----------



## Ralphy1 (Aug 19, 2015)

Well, she did take a bite...nthego:


----------



## Davey Jones (Aug 19, 2015)

Here's a follow up to that 11 year old girl.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/13/americas/paraguay-young-rape-victim-gives-birth/


----------

