Welcome to Gaia! ::

Reply Pro-Life/Pro-Choice Discussion
We're not all bad ... Goto Page: [] [<] 1 2 3 ... 4 5 6 7

Quick Reply

Enter both words below, separated by a space:

Can't read the text? Click here

Submit

WatersMoon110
Crew

PostPosted: Mon Dec 24, 2007 3:47 pm


divineseraph
WatersMoon110
There have been cases where (I think they were all) women have killed abusive partners and not gotten charged with murder (battered woman syndrome). But it isn't as common as it was at one point.

I also wouldn't want to go to jail, so I don't plan on killing anyone.


It's not ok to kill an abuser using your offspring as a trap, but it IS ok to kill your offspring to get him away? Seems a bit unfair, to me. I'm not for the "sins of our fathers" thing.
I didn't say it wasn't okay to kill an abusive partner. I said that one might go to jail for it, though in the past some women were able to not go to jail because their partners were abusive.

Personally, I don't think that people should get involved with abusive people. I understand why someone would not want to carry a pregnancy to term if their partner was abusive, but I really don't know how I would react to such a thing (since my abuser forcibly gave me an abortion - I had no choice in the matter). But, my husband isn't abusive, and I wouldn't abort any healthy pregnancy we created - though we take precautions not to get pregnant until we want to be.

I really can't say if it is okay to abort a pregnancy if one's partner is abusive or if it is okay to kill one's abusive partner. I'm sure, to the people who do either of these things, it seems like the only option. But there are safe houses where one can go (with one's children) to get away from an abuser - and I feel that this is the best option.
PostPosted: Mon Dec 24, 2007 4:39 pm


divineseraph
ShadowIce
WatersMoon110
I hope that any woman not in an abusive relationship would discuss a pregnancy with her partner!


One of the situations where I would have an abortion without fail is if the father was abusive. When I worked in a domestic violence shelter and safe exchange center, I watched as women were tied for the rest of their lives to abusive men because they had a child together (and I'm sure it can go the other way--the woman abusing the man while he is tied to her through his child--but I didn't see that). If I thought I could sever the man's parental rights because he abused me, I would reconsider. But that's never the case. Instead, I had to watch as women were forced to do things like go to court and justify why they hadn't wanted to hand their child over to the father for the scheduled visit immediately after he went into an intense rage and threatened the staff of the exchange center.

Now, I hope to avoid this situation altogether by never having sex with an abusive man, but I don't imagine any of the people who get caught in this situation sat around thinking, "Wow, s/he really is abusive! I want to have a baby with her/him."


If someone is abusing you, stab them in their sleep. Not being facecious. I don't stand for that s**t. If there is absolutely no legal way to make them gtfo, destroy the problem.


It's better not to kill them unless they are actually trying to kill you first (best thing to do is report them and try to leave).

I saw a movie once based on a true story called "Beds are Burning" where this women killed her husband by setting him on fire while he was sleeping. She tried to get help many times but he still kept abusing her (she got off, they claimed it self-defense).

ShadowIce-Judges giving the children to the abusive father's is the dumbest thing they can do.
I can't believe that they can give them up to someone that could end up abusing them or worse,kill them.

Isn't there a law agaist them having custody?

rweghrheh


ShadowIce

PostPosted: Mon Dec 24, 2007 8:40 pm


sachiko_sohma
ShadowIce-Judges giving the children to the abusive father's is the dumbest thing they can do.
I can't believe that they can give them up to someone that could end up abusing them or worse,kill them.

Isn't there a law agaist them having custody?

Well, there are laws in place to protect people from abuse, but a lot of times those laws don't help. First, in many instances partner on partner abuse is not considered to be abuse of children. For example, let's say my boyfriend beats me unconscious in front of our children. Judges can (and do) rule that this had nothing to do with whether or not can see his children because he beat me, not them. Second, you have to be able to prove that the abuse happened. A man molests his child? A woman beats her child with a coat hanger? Means nothing if it can't be proven. Third, a lot of the time parents are allowed to see their children even if abuse can be proven because the parents have "changed" and/or what can be proven isn't "that bad." It is really, really hard to get someone's parental rights terminated against their will, even if they are awful parents. Fourth, all of this means that I would have to put up with abuse for an unknown period of time before I can even start trying to break it off. A guy beats me black and blue every day for a year, I leave, and then two months later I find out I'm pregnant? I don't know about you, but I don't want to go back and hope that someday I'll be able to get his parental rights terminated. I want to know then and there that as far as the law is concerned, he can't make me have contact with him.

Now, I hope to avoid this entire situation by not getting involved with an abusive person. That way, I don't have to make this decision. But I don't think most women go into a relationship thinking, "Man, he's so awful that I can't imagine having a child tie us together."
PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2007 8:28 am


ShadowIce
sachiko_sohma
ShadowIce-Judges giving the children to the abusive father's is the dumbest thing they can do.
I can't believe that they can give them up to someone that could end up abusing them or worse,kill them.

Isn't there a law agaist them having custody?

Well, there are laws in place to protect people from abuse, but a lot of times those laws don't help. First, in many instances partner on partner abuse is not considered to be abuse of children. For example, let's say my boyfriend beats me unconscious in front of our children. Judges can (and do) rule that this had nothing to do with whether or not can see his children because he beat me, not them. Second, you have to be able to prove that the abuse happened. A man molests his child? A woman beats her child with a coat hanger? Means nothing if it can't be proven. Third, a lot of the time parents are allowed to see their children even if abuse can be proven because the parents have "changed" and/or what can be proven isn't "that bad." It is really, really hard to get someone's parental rights terminated against their will, even if they are awful parents. Fourth, all of this means that I would have to put up with abuse for an unknown period of time before I can even start trying to break it off. A guy beats me black and blue every day for a year, I leave, and then two months later I find out I'm pregnant? I don't know about you, but I don't want to go back and hope that someday I'll be able to get his parental rights terminated. I want to know then and there that as far as the law is concerned, he can't make me have contact with him.

Now, I hope to avoid this entire situation by not getting involved with an abusive person. That way, I don't have to make this decision. But I don't think most women go into a relationship thinking, "Man, he's so awful that I can't imagine having a child tie us together."


That IS child abuse. It does not have to be physical harm, nor even emotional, directly aimed at the child in question.

And even then, ******** laws.Our forefathers have said- if something is ******** up with the world or laws or rulers, it is your right and duty to change it, even if it means breaking rules to do so. that beurocratic crap is just that- crap. If logic and common sense beats out destructive laws, then go with that.

divineseraph


ShadowIce

PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2007 10:37 am


divineseraph
That IS child abuse. It does not have to be physical harm, nor even emotional, directly aimed at the child in question.

Oh, I agree. 100% No question. Which is part of why it was so hard to work at a domestic violence shelter. You interacted with victims of abuse while knowing that in all likelihood the abusers would still get court ordered visitation.

divineseraph
And even then, ******** laws.Our forefathers have said- if something is ******** up with the world or laws or rulers, it is your right and duty to change it, even if it means breaking rules to do so. that beurocratic crap is just that- crap. If logic and common sense beats out destructive laws, then go with that.

Certainly it would be best to change the laws. But simply breaking the laws won't make them change. If my goal is to protect myself, to keep from being abused, then breaking the law and being sent to jail does not accomplish that goal.
PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2007 3:28 pm


The problem is that you're looking at the laws from the wrong angle. The parents don't have a right to see their child in law, it's not that the father who beats his wife has a right to see his child it's that the child has a right to see their parents. So just because the husband beats the wife doesn't mean that the man is an unfit father. Unless it can be proven that him being in the childs life will be negative to the child directly (ie. beating them, neglecting them etc.) the child has a right to see them.

My mom explained it to me when Danielle (my best friend) was looking to get sole custody of her daughter.

Decrepit Faith
Crew

6,100 Points
  • Elocutionist 200
  • Tycoon 200
  • Generous 100

ShadowIce

PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2007 3:53 pm


Beware the Jabberwock
The problem is that you're looking at the laws from the wrong angle. The parents don't have a right to see their child in law, it's not that the father who beats his wife has a right to see his child it's that the child has a right to see their parents. So just because the husband beats the wife doesn't mean that the man is an unfit father. Unless it can be proven that him being in the childs life will be negative to the child directly (ie. beating them, neglecting them etc.) the child has a right to see them.

My mom explained it to me when Danielle (my best friend) was looking to get sole custody of her daughter.

Well, it's not just that the child has the right to see the parent. Certainly that is something the court system wants, but that isn't all of it. As it is, parents can go to court and say, "The other parent is depriving me of my right to see my child." The child doesn't have to go to court and say, "My parent is depriving me of my right to see my other parent, " and people don't have to go to court on behalf of a child for visitation rights. This is part of why parents can see their children even if the children don't want to see them. It's also why (to the best of my knowledge) parents aren't forced to see their children against their will. As far as I'm aware, legally a parent can force a child to visit, but a child cannot force a parent to visit.

Regardless, my point still stands. Whether the right stems from the child or from the parent, I would be equally tied to an abusive person.

And I don't think you can beat your wife and be a fit father. As far as I'm concerned, beating your wife is abusing your children.

EDIT: Is there really a right for the child to know their parents? I know that the court system thinks it is good for a child to know their parents, but I'm less certain about it being a right. I mean, if that is an right, then where does that place adoption and/or other modes of willing termination of parental rights?
PostPosted: Wed Dec 26, 2007 7:06 am


miyo_esparanza
divineseraph
That's really the pro-choice stance in a nutshell.

"I do what I want, and am willing to kill something I legally can in order to get it"


This quote really hurts. Is it really the way that most pro-lifers view the pro-choicers?


Miyo, to get back to your original question, I'd just like to say that while it's possible, even probable, that most pro-choicers are not like the mentally unbalanced people in the ADT, they HAVE colored my view of pro-choicers.

Red Calypso

Reply
Pro-Life/Pro-Choice Discussion

Goto Page: [] [<] 1 2 3 ... 4 5 6 7
 
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games
Mini-Games
Play with GCash
Play with Platinum