Posted by
Playful Walrus on Thursday, September 25, 2008 3:22:40 PM
The Los Angeles Times has been a biased “pro-choice” paper for a long time now, and it comes as no surprise that they ran an editorial today recommending a “no” vote on Proposition 4, which would require parental notification (in some cases) that their minor child is going to have a doctor slaughter their grandchild. It sure would be nice to know why you teen daughter is hemorrhaging, wouldn’t it? Ah, but when abortion is your sacrament, what matters most is making sure there is a dead baby, and removing anything that could probably slow that result down.
They start out knocking the example used by the backers.
That's how far the Proposition 4 campaign reached to come up with a poster girl.
Well remember there is a “right to privacy”, so it isn’t like it is shouted from the rooftops when this sort of thing goes on. But of course to the Left, symbolism matters much more than substance. They don’t like the symbol here.
There's no evidence that California's teenage girls are harmed by abortions with any frequency, whether or not their parents have been notified.
Oh that’s a good one. Do you think there are no psychological and emotional consequences that the parents could better understand if they knew? What crock.
In fact, under the guise of protecting underage girls, this proposal really is just the latest attempt to impose any obstacle in the exercise of reproductive freedom.
Lovely euphemism. Scott Peterson was engaging in reproductive and marital freedom. We’re talking minors here, and it wouldn’t be much of an obstacle. How is it that these girls can't legally consent to sex, but they are old enough to undergo surgery resulting from sex without even notifying their parents? You can read more about this by clicking on the Proposition 4 tag below.