Our tax dollars at work. Is the fact that the father of the baby turned the mother in reason enough to allow the killing of the innocent unborn child?
I have been on FR for over six years and this is the first time I have posted a story. I apologize if it doesn't turn out correctly.
1 posted on
05/01/2003 4:39:39 AM PDT by
Russ
To: Russ
2 posted on
05/01/2003 5:05:28 AM PDT by
pubmom
(Somebody who lives in Indiana, Pa, proud birthplace of Jimmy Stewart and opera great Renee Fleming.)
To: Russ
Absolutely sickening.
It's no different than if she wanted to get her teeth capped Yeah right.
What else was it that the PPh woman said? Something about cruel and unusual punishment because she would be able to get one if she weren't in prison? SHE IS IN PRISON. You are not afforded all of your rights after you commit a crime.
To: Russ
Polyak said denying A.G. an abortion because she is in jail and unable to pay is cruel and illegal.>>
No, what is cruel and should be illegal is a woman being a spiteful b*tch who can't take the heat of her own illegal activity and decides to take it out on an innocent baby. So Polyak thinks it's just fine and dandy that because the woman is ticked at the guy who fathered the child, she should suck out a baby right until birth? Now that's some cruel hearted stuff.
The failure of the county to provide her with necessary medical care demonstrates a deliberate indifference to her rights, he said. >>
Since when is an abortion "necessary" at all, especially when your want it because you are ticked at the father of the child? Pretty questionable use of the word necessary.
6 posted on
05/01/2003 5:24:41 AM PDT by
glory
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson