RightFaith Clouds military


Welcome To RightFaith
I Enjoyed Writing These
RightFaith BlogRoll
Aggregators

Friday, February 03, 2006

Caught on Tape: PP Hides Illegal Sex

I was enraged by this, but not surprised. When someone's conscience becomes accustomed to rejecting morality, the only thing left is sheer evil. In this example, Planned Parenthood workers appear to have been giving 13 year old advice how to hide a relationship with 22 year old and have an abortion.
Take, for example, these tape recordings made by a woman posing as a 13 year old girl. The “girl” calls in to 90 - that’s right NINETY - different Planned Parenthood clinics in California to inquire about getting an abortion. In each one she describes herself as 13 years old with a 22 year old boyfriend. In each and every case, the Planned Parenthood operator either completely ignores the fact that the girl is the victim of statutory rape, or they give the “girl” directions on how she can continue on with her relationship, obtain an abortion AND not get caught!
Incredible. Every single one of the people should be sent directly to jail for hiding statutory rape.

Thoughtful Readers Speak:
Or, alternatively, maybe 100% of PP operators aren't dumbasses, and they saw through a rather transparent ruse.

I'm actually pleased, however, by the response of PP operators to this situation. The purpose of PP is not to catch sex crimes; it's to ensure the reproductive health of women. Gaining a reputation of being tattle-tales doesn't further that mission, and I'm a lot more concerned about a 13-year-old girl's access to medical and pre-natal care - and indeed, abortion, if she wishes - than I am about catching statutory "rapists."
 
a 22 year old having sex with a 13 year old is rape; its a heinous crime and you are no better than the planned parenthood for defending them; you disgust me.
 
In Japan the age of consent is 14.
 
Maybe you can explain to me what physiological changes happen to a person precisely on their 16th birthday that suddenly bestows upon them the ability to consent to sexual intercourse.

What you describe as a "heinous crime" of "rape" suddenly becomes perfectly legal and indeed, sanctioned by society, when the two participants are married. Maybe you can explain to me what physiological changes occur on a person's wedding day that suddenly bestows upon them the ability to consent to sex?

Your side of the aisle regularly tries and executes people younger than this "girl" was supposed to be for murder, as adults; you're telling me that you have no problem trying a 13-year-old for murder as an adult, but the idea that she might also be able to consent to sex as an adult is completely inconcievable?

If you like, I'll post a list of prominent Christian and American figures who, with society's complete sanction, committed what you describe as a "heinous crime" within the boundaries of matrimony. Your righteous indignation rings just a little false.
 
I agree that Planned Parenthood should be dealt with for not reporting what appeared to be a case of statutory rape.
It is not only physiological, but mental and emotional criteria that is used to determine if one is old enough to consent. There is a big difference between a 13 year old and a 16 year old. The law is trying to protect children from being mentally and emotionally and physically abused by adults who want nothing but to use them. For someone to use children is a crime! If it had been a real situation, there is also the issue of fornication. I see nothing wrong with a 16 year old getting MARRIED and having relations. Mary the mother of Jesus was about 16, most commentators say.
As far as Japan is concerned, I wouldn't base my morality on a society that knows nothing about the Gospel.
 
Christian missionaries have been all over the world. Japan knows about Jesus. Nobody cares about "fornication". As a biologist, I have to say that all these hang-ups about sex are pretty insane. Sex is a natural part of life, and you go and twist it and give people complexes. Look at Ed Gein.

You would let your 16 year old kid get married? Not only that, you would let your 16 year old get married because that was ok 2,000 years ago. There is so much wrong with you, I don't even know where to start.
 
Who cares what Japan thinks?

This is a lie: Your side of the aisle regularly tries and executes people younger than this "girl" was supposed to be for murder, as adults; you're telling me that you have no problem trying a 13-year-old for murder as an adult, but the idea that she might also be able to consent to sex as an adult is completely inconcievable?

this is an overgeneralization: Nobody cares about "fornication".

this is a presumption: You would let your 16 year old kid get married?

Unfortunately, this is wrong too: Christian missionaries have been all over the world.

lies, misstatements, presumptions...you comments lack credibility. but whats new?
 
The law is trying to protect children from being mentally and emotionally and physically abused by adults who want nothing but to use them.

Granted, but the law also criminalizes sexual relationships that are objectively not harmful, abusive, or one-sided in the way that you portray.

I believe that a just legal system prosecutes those who do harm and does not punish those who do no harm. Apparently it works differently for Christians?

This is a lie:

No, it's not: http://www.showmenews.com/2006/Jan/20060112News012.asp
 
Ok, let me rephrase. Only crazy people with bizzare sexual hang-ups care about "fornication".
 
Chet said:
"I believe that a just legal system prosecutes those who do harm and does not punish those who do no harm. Apparently it works differently for Christians?"

Define what you mean buy "a just legal system". What standard should we use for justice?

erica said:
"Ok, let me rephrase. Only crazy people with bizzare sexual hang-ups care about "fornication"."

This is just personal opinion, and name calling, not rational discussion.

"As a biologist,"

Do you use biology as the only standard by which you interpret life?
 
The scientific method is the only reliable method we have of discovering things about reality. Everything else is equivalent to making stuff up. It is possible to believe that dancing around the fire will make it rain, but that doesn't mean that your belief actually corresponds to reality. Reality is not that the rain gods are displeased because you didn't dance enough last month, reality is that you live on the dry side of the mountain range. If you think your beliefs are somehow different, better, or more logical than this, think again. The reality of the situation is that humans are animals and thus have a strong drive to mate. And there isn't anything wrong with that. Wanting to have sex, thinking about sex, having sex, etc doesn't make you a bad person. It makes you normal. What's bad is what happens when you take a normal urge and tell people they are bad for having it. Sex is fun, or at least it's supposed to be. I'm also sick of this idea that pregnancy and STDs are the "punishment" for engaging in "sinful" behavior. These don't have to be the consequences, provided appropriate precautions are taken. I've been having sex for pleasure (that's right, a WOMAN enjoying sex!) since I was 18, and I have never been ill or pregnant. According to you, I should have been punished for my sins a long time ago with some kind of hideous disease or an unwanted baby. But I get to have all the sex I want. I bet you conservatives just hate that.
 
erica said:
"The scientific method is the only reliable method we have of discovering things about reality."

How do you prove the truth of this statement?

"According to you, I should have been punished for my sins a long time ago with some kind of hideous disease or an unwanted baby."

I never said that, Nor did I intend to imply it. I hope you never do.
However, the Scriptures say that all sin will be judged either in this life or the next, and many times in both.
 
"The scientific method is the only reliable method we have of discovering things about reality."

How do you prove the truth of this statement?


By inspection. For 1000 years in Europe, we used religious revelation as a guide to reality. The only thing that we accomplished were stacking stones to make useless cathedrals. In the 400 years since the scientific method - developed by Christians, as you always remind me (which makes it very ironic indeed that Christians are now the ones attacking that method) - we've conquered diseases, prevented 1.6 billion people from starving to death, connected almost every human being to their friends, loved ones, and total strangers, no matter how distant, and even put a man on the moon.

By inspection, the scientific method provides more accurate, more useful knowledge about the world than any of the alternatives. If you believe I'm wrong then by all means, present the more useful alternative.
 
See, you view my actions as sin, which therefore implies that it is bad and should be punished. Maybe not now, maybe not by society, but someday, somewhere, I will reap the rewards of my sin. Right?
 
chet said...

"By inspection. For 1000 years in Europe, we used religious revelation as a guide to reality. The only thing that we accomplished was stacking stones to make useless cathedrals. In the 400 years since the scientific method - developed by Christians, as you always remind me (which makes it very ironic indeed that Christians are now the ones attacking that method) - we've conquered diseases, prevented 1.6 billion people from starving to death, connected almost every human being to their friends, loved ones, and total strangers, no matter how distant, and even put a man on the moon."



When you say "By inspection", are you saying the scientific method? If not, then by your standard, your "Inspection" has to be proven or disproved by the scientific method. If by “inspection, you mean the scientific method, then the scientific method has to validate itself.


If you are implying that Christianity is useless, and at the same time saying that the scientific method was developed by Christians, then you seem to be contradicting yourself.


The problem I have is, instead of using science as a tool to understand God's World; it is put in place of God.
 
Erica said...

See, you view my actions as sin, which therefore implies that it is bad and should be punished. Maybe not now, maybe not by society, but someday, somewhere, I will reap the rewards of my sin. Right?


Yes. Unless we confess and repent of our sins and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.
 
When you say "By inspection", are you saying the scientific method?

No, I mean, by inspection. You asked for proof; in doing so I guess I presumed you were familiar with modes of proof. Apparently I was mistaken? If so why did you ask for something you weren't qualified to assess?

If you are implying that Christianity is useless, and at the same time saying that the scientific method was developed by Christians, then you seem to be contradicting yourself.

Fallacy of composition - Christianity is not responsible for everything that Christians do. A fact that your side is so eager to remind me of when we're talking about something bad that it's surprising that you've forgotten in this context.
 
Kenali dan Kunjungi Objek Wisata di Pandeglang
Keyword Kenali Pandeglang
Mohon dukungannya yach....?!
Semangat..semangat..!!
Agar terjalin tali silaturrahmi di antara kita.
Pandeglang telah hilang Kenali Si Dunia Aneh
Mari bersama Teknisi Komputer dalam kontes Kenali dan Kunjungi Objek Wisata di Pandeglang
 
Oes Tsetnoc one of the ways in which we can learn seo besides Mengembalikan Jati Diri Bangsa. By participating in the Oes Tsetnoc or Mengembalikan Jati Diri Bangsa we can improve our seo skills. To find more information about Oest Tsetnoc please visit my Oes Tsetnoc pages. And to find more information about Mengembalikan Jati Diri Bangsa please visit my Mengembalikan Jati Diri Bangsa pages. Thank you So much.
Oes Tsetnoc | Semangat Mengembalikan Jati Diri Bangsa
 
Post a Comment



<< Home
RIGHTFAITH: Where everything favors the stewardship of patrimony. All content is believed to be correct but may be amended based upon new information. The content of this page may be republished with proper citation without the expressed consent of the author. This site is not, in any manner whatsoever, associated with the religious philosophism from the Indian penninsula. All comments or emails to the author become the property of the author and may be published or deleted without notice or reason provided. Copyrighted 2005.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?


Social Conservative Action Centers

Archives
Web Blog Pinging Service
allianceanonymous


Add this blog to my Technorati Favorites!
GOP Bloggers
rwn