Teenager Gives Birth in a Tent, Proceeds to Beat Baby to Death "Out of Fear of Disappontment" - Polidicks

[QUOTE=EliteGuy;41699296]Killing a newborn baby has nothing to do with abortion laws, the teenager should be charged with murder/seek mental health evaluation.[/QUOTE] this would have never happened if she aborted to be fair pregnancy hormones can break already emotional people

I'm sure this'll just make them even more disappointed.

[QUOTE=sgman91;41699319]Since when is fear of disappointment a legitimate reason to get an abortion?!? Fear of physical/mental abuse possibly, but not fear of disappointment.[/QUOTE] since when do you need to justify an abortion?

[QUOTE=EliteGuy;41699296]Killing a newborn baby has nothing to do with abortion laws, the teenager should be charged with murder/seek mental health evaluation.[/QUOTE] um i don't think she was in the best state of mind - why are you just jumping for 'CHARGE HER WITH MURDER' [editline]4th August 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=ScratchNsniff;41710067]OH NO My parents might be disappointed I got pregnant, lets beat the newborn baby girl over the head until it's dead. That will fix everything! I wonder what the parents think now.[/QUOTE] a teenager giving birth in front of her parents that didn't know she was pregnant while camping far away from any hospital not being completely lucid? say it ain't so

[QUOTE=sgman91;41700177]I'm slightly disgusted that a potential human life holds absolutely no value to you, even ignoring the VERY grey scientific line of where life actually begins.[/QUOTE] im completely disgusted that you think your "morals" should have any bearing on a woman's decision with her body a lot of hideously ignorant armchair psychologists/lawyers up in this

[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;41707769]The bigger question here is why do you think it's not worth preserving a life because you deem their future to be less than ideal? There are so many different directions a person's life can go, you can't just generally brand it all as a depressing existence and by that decide whether there can live or die. Unless you can definitively prove that a person who has not had a chance to live their full life will end up wishing that they had never lived anyway, I don't see any way of really justifying it.[/QUOTE] It's not a matter of certainty, it's a matter of probability. If the parents don't give the child up for adoption, it's quite likely (in comparison to an intentional birth) that the child will grow up neglected or otherwise in poverty (a variety of abortions are given due to the parents not being emotionally, physically, or financially prepared to take care of a child). If they do give them up for adoption, there's a risk that they end up being adopted to a shitty family in the first place, if they ever get adopted at all. Not to mention that there's a risk that the mother could die due to pregnancy complications, or otherwise do something like this, as mentioned in the article. Are all of these potentially-bad outcomes really worth preserving a cluster of cells/undeveloped organs incapable of self-awareness, having never been exposed to the outside world? Why do we even care so much about abortion, when the child is pretty likely to be fucked over later in life anyway? In the United States, they have no free medical care, they have a terrible public school system, massive university costs and the potential to pile themselves down with student loans, and are going to be entering a job market that sees them as disposable. As is par for the course, they're going to be struggling to get by, because they're going to be working two jobs that underwork and underpay them and are probably going to fire them after a few months anyway, if they don't quit by then. The point of the paragraph above is that if you really cared about preserving the potential for human life, you'd be working to care for the life that's already being brought into the world with intention, rather than forcing other people to preserve unintentional/unwanted births.

[QUOTE=breakyourfac;41707932]Take a look at any single, teen mom (hint: if they're not already single they will be soon). Tell me if it looks like the mom is having a blast giving up her social life. do you think it is good for a baby to grow up not receiving the love & care it needs? I know like 4 girls firsthand who got knocked up in highschool and their loves are a living hell to put it short .[/QUOTE] That's still making an incredibly over-presumptuous decision, not to mention based on anecdotal evidence. Also using this logic, shouldn't we just euthanize any child born through a single teen mom, because if their life isn't worth living why let them live anyway? I honestly can't see any good results when sticking to this type of thinking. [QUOTE=joes33431;41712448]It's not a matter of certainty, it's a matter of probability. If the parents don't give the child up for adoption, it's quite likely (in comparison to an intentional birth) that the child will grow up neglected or otherwise in poverty (a variety of abortions are given due to the parents not being emotionally, physically, or financially prepared to take care of a child). If they do give them up for adoption, there's a risk that they end up being adopted to a shitty family in the first place, if they ever get adopted at all. Not to mention that there's a risk that the mother could die due to pregnancy complications, or otherwise do something like this, as mentioned in the article. Are all of these potentially-bad outcomes really worth preserving a cluster of cells/undeveloped organs incapable of self-awareness, having never been exposed to the outside world? Why do we even care so much about abortion, when the child is pretty likely to be fucked over later in life anyway? In the United States, they have no free medical care, they have a terrible public school system, massive university costs and the potential to pile themselves down with student loans, and are going to be entering a job market that sees them as disposable. As is par for the course, they're going to be struggling to get by, because they're going to be working two jobs that underwork and underpay them and are probably going to fire them after a few months anyway, if they don't quit by then. The point of the paragraph above is that if you really cared about preserving the potential for human life, you'd be working to care for the life that's already being brought into the world with intention.[/QUOTE] Probability has to do with how certain you are, also probability would imply you actually are backed by statistics, unless a majority of these people end up committing suicide you have no real rational backing to your statements(even if you did have statistics you'd be making choices for another person without their permission). I guess I don't care about preserving the potential of human life, because I value a person beyond how much they can enjoy or contribute to modern society. I can't see how people think they can judge who lives and who dies like this.

[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;41712449]That's still making an incredibly over-presumptuous decision, not to mention based on anecdotal evidence. Also using this logic, shouldn't we just euthanize any child born through a single teen mom, because if their life isn't worth living why let them live anyway?[/QUOTE] No, because they and their parents are the ones consenting to the operation, we aren't trying to force them to. It's a matter of personal liberty as much as it is moral choice. [QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;41712449]I honestly can't see any good results when sticking to this type of thinking.[/QUOTE] Women get to choose what to do with their bodies instead of having old white men choose for them.

[QUOTE=joes33431;41712486]No, because they and their parents are the ones consenting to the operation, we aren't trying to force them to. It's a matter of personal liberty as much as it is moral choice.[/QUOTE] Personal liberty for everyone but the child. [QUOTE=joes33431;41712486]Women get to choose what to do with their bodies instead of having old white men choose for them.[/QUOTE] and people don't get to choose whether they live or die, because old white men choose for them.

[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;41712550]Personal liberty for everyone but the child.[/QUOTE] It's not a child. It's not even capable of comprehending its situation. [QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;41712550]and people don't get to choose whether they live or die, because old white men choose for them.[/QUOTE] A lack of rights for someone on one spectrum doesn't mean that they shouldn't have rights on another. [editline]4th August 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;41712449]Probability has to do with how certain you are,[/QUOTE] Probability is what we use because there is no 100% certainty. It's likelihood. [QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;41712449]also probability would imply you actually are backed by statistics, unless a majority of these people end up committing suicide you have no real rational backing to your statements[/QUOTE] [url]https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/f_adimpact.cfm[/url] [QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;41712449](even if you did have statistics you'd be making choices for another person without their permission).[/QUOTE] They are not capable of making the decision, because they are a fetus, which is not a human being, and will not have truly informed consent until 16-18 years after the fact. [QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;41712449]I guess I don't care about preserving the potential of human life, because I value a person beyond how much they can enjoy or contribute to modern society. I can't see how people think they can judge who lives and who dies like this.[/QUOTE] So you value someone's pure existence more than their happiness. Lovely.

[QUOTE=joes33431;41713017]It's not a child. It's not even capable of comprehending its situation.[/QUOTE] I suppose as long as you hold by the arbitrary decision of saying someone's human based on whether they've had a chance to grow their brain or not, we won't be able to discuss the topic. Wouldn't whether they're genetically human and alive be a better criteria of deciding whether they should have the rights of a human being? Just because their body isn't finished growing seems like a cruel reason to deem someone non-human. [QUOTE=joes33431;41713017]A lack of rights for someone on one spectrum doesn't mean that they shouldn't have rights on another.[/QUOTE] That's easy to say as a general statement, but when the two spectrums affect each other, it becomes much less easy to decide. [QUOTE=joes33431;41713017]Probability is what we use because there is no 100% certainty. It's likelihood. [url]https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/f_adimpact.cfm[/url][/QUOTE] There is nothing in the link that implies the majority of adopted children end up killing themselves or wishing they had never lived. It even states that adults that were adopted adjust similarly to adults that weren't, of course they have some psychological issues, but that's what therapy's for. This is no way to judge whether a person's life is worth living. [QUOTE=joes33431;41713017]So you value someone's pure existence more than their happiness. Lovely.[/QUOTE] I value someone because they are human and by that have intrinsic value, so by that I also value their happiness because I value them as a person. I do not devalue them as people because I think they may lead unhappy lives though, that's ridiculous.

[QUOTE=The mouse;41699287]What? :suicide:[/QUOTE] Happens all the time. When my friend's brother's girlfriend was pregnant, his parents (and I) thought she had just gained a little bit of weigh. She just looked a little more chubby than usual. Still, it's a bit weird when it happens to an 18 year old that probably lives with their parents. She really has to be fat to pull a "I'm not pregnant" when she sees her family every day. Edit: Oh, yeah. Checked out the article. She's fat.