I'm unwaged, but would still give to this brave family.

I can not think of a more efficient way to force women to back alley abortion clinics, and create lots of dead women, than unjust laws like this.

Just another example of conservative thought harming society as a whole just so they can punish people who violate their bizarre and arbitrary chastity rules.

Hello NARAL, are you there???? NOW, Hello???

@2 +1

Mission accomplished. Blood boiled.

"Working mom going to prison for illegally giving harmful drugs to her daughter, causing the girl to need hospitalization."

That's the actual headline, Savage. If this woman through negligence left an infant in a car and the kid was hurt you'd be okay with the law intervening. But buying medicine online without a prescription or (obviously) an understanding of possible side effects? Oh, and doing so in direct contravention of the laws of her state? She's an innocent martyr to out if control conservatives!!!!

Not a single coherent thought in that STD riddled brain, is there?

Ordering drugs online is a bad idea, but prison? No. Whereupon the child will miss her mother greatly and sadly unnecessarily feel very guilty and internalize it. That's NOT what our country is about. The punishment does not fit the transgression (it's not even really a crime).

I believe this is not an unknown side effect of the drug. Per this NYTimes Magazine article of last weekend (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/31/magazi…), it seems they could have avoided all trouble by just saying the daughter was having a miscarriage -- treatment is identical.

Very unfortunate, for sure, that by telling the truth, she wound up in legal trouble, especially considering there is state-mandated lying involved in getting a legal abortion.

@6 - Yes, she gave her daughter dangerous drugs, but if a safe abortion had been made available, she never would have been in the situation to decide between administering medicine without medical advice (which the government has inexplicably barred her from practically getting) and forcing her daughter to endure an unwanted pregnancy.

But you're not stupid, we know that, you're just an asshole.

@6: Had you bothered to read the story, you would have seen that the side effects were cramping/bleeding, which is always a possibility with such drugs, and one that happens when they are prescribed as well. This does not make the drug especially "harmful," nor does it mean that the mother had no idea what she was doing.

By the way, do you know what is much more dangerous than such pills? Carrying a pregnancy to term. Much worse side effects, much more risk of permanent injury, much more risk of death.

But like was said above, you don't care, you are just an asshole.

Why is it that neither reproductive rights activists, nor pro-choice conservatives, support IUDs?

It seems like it's the perfect answer (in it's new, safer form).

(1) Effective
(2) Long lasting (5 to 7 years)
(3) No procedures or maintenance (spontaneous)
(4) Does not "abort" an egg

Is it that it's "too good" so people have nothing to argue about?

God. I don't live in a state that has these ludicrous waiting periods, but if I did, I would put out-of-towners up for the duration of the waiting period. Anyone want to start an AbortionBnB?

The hospital reported her to the police? I'd be interested to know their justification.

@6: There's a thing called a forest. Try seeing it sometime through the trees.

@6 - Side effects are completely unpredictable, you fool. Some people get them, some don't. I'm currently dealing with side effects that happen in 1 out of 10,000 cases from a drug I was given in the hospital last December. The side effects were so distantly possible we didn't even consider them. I'm with Dan and most of the others on this one; and I'd suggest that your smug certainty doesn't advance your cause.

@6...

This is essentially a "back alley" medical abortion. It's the desperate act of a stonewalled person.

She gave her daughter a drug which caused her to need medical care. Now, one of two things is true, Teddy. Either she did know what she was doing and is criminally liable or didn't and she's criminally negligent.

Which do you prefer.

And I'm tired of the red herrings. The girl had every choice. She chose to have unprotected sex. An unplanned pregnancy is hardly an unknown side effect. Murdering an innocent baby to resolve her self caused problem shouldn't be the go to answer. For anyone with an ounce of common humanity anyway.

@11 We support ALL forms of contraception. Moron.

@11, I have an iud, and it's great, however, it took about 6 months for my body to adjust to it, I cost 460$, (I have health insurance, cover the office visit but not the actual device) and they often don't prescribe them to women who have not already given birth at least once (for some reason, they get expelled more often from the uterus if that is not the case)

But otherwise, I agree, it great, lasts 10 years, bonus higher libido and 15 lbs disappears after going off the pill

#19

Planned Parenthood answers:

Can I get an IUD if I haven’t had a child?

No – this is a really common myth, so we’re glad you brought it up. Most people with uteruses can use an IUD safely, regardless of whether they’ve had children.

The reason this myth is out there is because it used to be true that you could only get an IUD if you’d already had children. It can sometimes be a bit easier to insert an IUD into a uterus if a woman’s already given birth — but it’s still safe and simple even if you haven’t.

http://plannedparenthood.tumblr.com/post…

Obviously I have no first hand experience getting an IUD, so thanks for the first-hand account of potential discomfort.

But it seems to me that for young, poor and impoverished girls, where any pregnancy in the years of 12-19 would simply push them back down the ladder, that offering free IUDs would help from all perspectives.

@2: Exactly. When you restrict and criminalize abortion, it doesn't stop happening; it just becomes more dangerous and typically practiced by people without any sort of medical license.

@6: Please provide evidence for your libelous claim that Mr. Dan Savage suffers from neurological damage related to sexually-transmitted diseases.
If you gave a damn about state law, you wouldn't have proudly and flagrantly violated it by refusing to renew a lease to lesbian tenants. (Contrary to your ignorant insistence that it's legal, such refusal IS A CRIME under Washington state law.)

@17: Where's your knowledge that the girl "chose to have unprotected sex"? She may have used protection and had that protection fail. (It does happen, especially when those using it haven't been instructed in its proper use.) She may have received abstinence-only sex ed in school and not known about any form of contraception, let alone how to use it. For that matter, where's the guy who knocked her up? He made just as much choice as she did, right?

But to you, everything happens the way it's supposed to. Only lazy people who don't want to work are ever poor. Only sluts who take stupid risks with their bodies get unintentionally pregnant. Conservatives are always right and liberals are always wrong. Everything is black and white.
It's a comforting way to see the world, certainly, but a childish and destructive one.

I read this article over the weekend, and my question is what stage of the pregnancy was the fetus aborted? Anything abortion after 20 weeks without medical supervison and approval is looked upon outside the bounds of Roe v. Wade.

No matter what, I can't stand these stories. I worked in Chile where abortion is/was illegal, and stuff like this happened all the time, criminalizing women..

A lot of states have not only restricted abortion, but also restricted contraception especially under medicare. Personally I think there's a solid reason why the "pro-life" politicians really want this. The measure of a capitalist economy is economic growth year over year. If workers wages are going to be stagnant for decades or generations as a means of keeping costs low and profits high, how do you grow the economy? With a higher population of course. Restrict abortion, restrict contraception, and you'll inevitably get a higher population of low wage workers to advertise at and get them to spend beyond their means. The political advantage of more babies is this: babies tie their parents down to whatever unfortunate economic situation they're in or even worsens it. When parents are working multiple jobs for less money they don't have the time to raise any sort of political ruckus. Finally, many children born into poverty will grow to be poor adults. That's the point of weakening public education and making college prohibitively expensive. It's all pretty much a strategy to make more people, make more poor people, and still grow the economy for the pockets of the powerful few.

@24

And the government has a car that runs on water! Water, man! Only, they're keeping it from us to keep their OPEC loving capitalist running dog masters in the money, man! It's all a conspiracy, man!

@17: Ok, you want to pretend to be stupid, fine. Doctors give people medication and they have side effects that sometimes send them to the hospital. Do you believe this is criminal negligence or a lack of education? Or is there a third option?

Second, how do you know she chose to have unprotected sex? I know you did not read the story, because you also would have seen that the mother was not charged for buying and giving pills without a prescription. She was charged with providing an abortion without being a medical professional. It was the abortion that was the crime, not the act of administering pills themselves.

What do you have to gain from lying like a rug and pretending to be an illiterate moron?

@20: No one has a problem with IUDs. People have a problem with your pervy belief that they should be forcefully inserted in 12 year old girls against their will. John Bailo is the dumbest motherfucker on the planet.

@25 it's because of shitstains like you that women have back alley abortions. Asshole.

>"The hospital reported her to the police? I'd be interested to know their justification."

@13: Yeah, it does seem a violation of doctor-patient confidentiality. Hospitals have evidence of all sorts of illegal activity around recreational drug use, prescription drug abuse and diversion, illegal immigration, etc. Is there a mandatory reporting requirement in those Pennsylvania laws akin to child and elder abuse? If not, the patient may have a claim against the hospital for violating her privacy rights under HIPAA.

SB; you are an idiot, you've always been an idiot and you will most likely continue to be an idiot for all eternity. You are an intellectual shitstain with no moral compass, no empathy and a vacuous sense of self superiority.
1) women have the constitutional right to privacy under the due process clause of the 14th Amendment and this right extends to a woman's decision to have an abortion.
2) abortifacients are safe to use. They have side effects like any other drugs. Among those side effects are cramps and excessive bleeding, which is what the daughter was treated for.
3) abortifacients are sold over the counter in many places because they are, generally, safe to use, efficient and better than a surgical procedure in early pregnancy.
4) there is no criminal act, negligent or otherwise. That it appears so to you is irrelevant.
5) if you're "tired of red herrings", stop fucking serving them, you vapid, ignorant piece of America hating filth.

@25: Yes, and Obama's extremist Islamic administration is not-so-secretly trying to destroy America! Gotta buy gold from Glenn Beck or we'll all be doomed to labor in Chinese salt mines!

@11/@20 remind us again about your plan to sterilize all women until you personally approve of their procreation.

@vl

Who is "Mr. Dan Savage?". You mean little Danny Boy the Savage? Again, the fainting spells at my barbarous and inhuman cruelty in language would be a bit more convincing if you applied the same standards to your buddies.

Ever gamble? I don't, but I understand the principle of playing the odds. Maybe this girl was raped. Maybe contraception failed. Maybe she was a naive innocent who thought the stork brought babies, not sex. But the odds are very much for a girl who made a choice to gave unprotected sex, and suffered the clearly known possible consequence. And it's unfair that girls bear the worst consequences of unprotected sex, but it's life, fair or not.

My choice to decide who lives in MY PROPERTY didn't send anyone to the hospital. And in the absence of harm to others the state has no legitimate business in my rental decisions. I chose and choose to ignore laws that violate my property rights.

As for the rest, to find a toddlers approach to politics, economics and social systems, I have good news for you! The Stranger and lefties generally have captured it perfectly. You need search no farther, young man.

@32 - None of your drivel changes the fact that your kind is responsible for denying that girl proper abortion services.

@21: Don't forget that he yells at people for having kids, but also finds outrageous that people would decide they couldn't have a kid, when that's what he would have told them...

And his precious god terminates a third of all pregnancies.

@30

Please cite where I made any of those claims.

Obama is a terrible, inexperience and thoroughly incompetent president, sure.
But he seems a decent husband and father. I doubt he has any faith but his own advancement, but even were he Muslim it shouldn't matter to anyone and doesn't to me. I'll doubtless be called racist for this post, but do not and never have cared about his skin color, merely his terrible policy decisions and inability to be a leader.

I was responding to a specific post. What do you imagine you're responding to?

@32: Thanks for finally admitting you are a criminal. Yet, you sit here and declare that this women should be persecuted for ignoring laws which violated the bodily rights of her daughter, while believing you should suffer no consequences for violating laws which you see as infringing on your property rights.

My god man, how the hell does your mind work? You are a walking contradiction. A bigger hypocrite could never exist.

And by the way, the reason life is more unfair for women is because of the exact kind of primitive and falalcious reasoning you just displayed.

@32: Denial of a right is a harm. Full stop. The people of this state have decided that those folks' right to discrimination free housing is greater than your right to discriminate, so if you don't like it, move to a country where they agree with you.

If Tom Wolf trounces Tom Corbett in November and is elected Governor, I hope he quickly moves to pardon this woman. She should not be going to jail.

@33

"Your kind responsible for denying that girl abortion services"

Thank you! That's among the nicest things anyone here has ever said to me!

@11 IUDs are not ideal for everyone. Mine was a disaster, giving me cramps and mood swings. Some women report zero effects from birth control; many of us try everything under the sun and it's a living hell. Personally, I would not want an IUD in my 16 year old, but that's me.

@32: I do apply the same standards as far as naming goes. I don't call you Subhumanblues or Seattlepoos or any of the other fun little names other SLOGgers have invented for you, nor do I misgender you the way some people do in mockery of your treatment of transgender persons. I call you by the name by which you have introduced yourself to us. I don't need to engage in schoolyard name-calling to make my feelings clear; notice that my insults focus on your arguments and attitude rather than on your person. Yes Seattleblues, I'm claiming the moral highground, your ignorant puffery and sanctimonious preaching be damned.

"Ever gamble? I don't, but I understand the principle of playing the odds."
I don't gamble, but you just did. I don't make statements of fact when I do not know any of the facts. A simple qualifier, such as "most likely" or "probably", would suffice to keep you from blatant factual inaccuracy. You're betting against the house when you try to get such ridiculous statements past me. I deal in facts. You deal in claims.

"My choice to decide who lives in MY PROPERTY didn't send anyone to the hospital. And in the absence of harm to others the state has no legitimate business in my rental decisions. I chose and choose to ignore laws that violate my property rights."
So if you're going to ignore laws that you feel are unjust, take your lumps for them. You have previously claimed that if someone wants to take a moral stand on a law they feel is unjust by engaging in civil disobedience that they must be willing to face the consequences. So why aren't you doing so? Because laws are for other people apparently.

Also, your claim of (paraphrased) "it's my property, so I can rent to whoever I want" falls flat. The Heart of Atlanta Motel made that claim in defense of its violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; it had refused to rent rooms to black patrons based on their race. The Supreme Court upheld the federal government's right to ban discriminatory service in privately-owned businesses!
You say the government has no right to say your publicly-operating business can't refuse service to people based on protected categories? The Supreme Court of the United States says otherwise. You're on the wrong side of history here, on the side of the storekeepers who refused to serve blacks at lunch counters. After all, why should Uncle Sam tell them that their business has to serve whites and Negroes alike?
I wonder what your black wife thinks of THAT, you boorish nincompoop.

Sex happens, it's a biological fact of life, preaching abstinence is a transparently ineffective tactic except in the halls of the legislature. Sex education in schools is horrible and misdirected. Laws are passed to restrict not only abortions but also access to affordable contraception. If the goal really was to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies, affordable or free contraception would be the law of the land. In many states you need private insurance coverage just to reduce the costs of contraception. And of course fewer and fewer people are receiving health insurance from their employers these days. Yes, you can blame the kids for having sex but that doesn't actually address the nature of the problem which isn't about individual choice but rather about society and its goals and values. The argument about personal responsibility concerning unwanted pregnancies is myopic for this reason: people being plunged into poverty actually affects YOU. People impoverished by unwanted children spend less on the products and services you provide through your business or employer. Perhaps the industries that make products and services for children might get a boost depending on if they sell products that are affordable for impoverished parents but beyond that the whole economy is depressed by pushing people into poverty. We're all connected to each other economically whether directly or by some number of degrees of separation. You may disagree with that but in your lifetime you've bought products that were manufactured in every state in the US and most countries around the world. Your economic loop doesn't begin and end with your job and pay.

This article just proves we are moving back to where we were when Roe v. Wade was passed: women resorting to dangerous solutions rather than have safe and sterile abortions by licensed physicians. Anti-choice hypocritical fundamentalist Xtians are winning. We can't let our guard down around those maniacal fuckers for one second. Fundies are the only group that believe looking backwards is progress.

@39 Rejoicing at the hardship caused by your sick amorality? Spoken like the American Taliban that you are, asshole.

@ 20 - Anti-choice activists target IUDs with their "Personhood" bills and lawsuits. They claim that IUDs are abortifacients. (This is bullshit, of course.) See the recent Hobby Lobby decision for proof of concept.

A better free birth control option might be birth control implants. They are inserted in the arm rather than the uterus and the "Personhood" people don't seem to be particularly aware of their existence. The down side is that they are only effective for three years rather than a decade. But they also don't carry the risk of uterine or abdominal perforation, so that's a definite plus.

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-…

And once it gains FDA approval, we should also offer free Vasalgel for men.

http://www.newmalecontraception.org/vasa…

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/03…

Nevermind the fact that it's just plain wrong to make a mother into a criminal for trying to help her child avoid a life of single parenthood and poverty. That doesn't break the cycle of poverty, it perpetuates it. People wonder where all the crime is coming from and yet they're not looking at society as an interconnected whole.

@35: Please cite where rhombus made any of THOSE OTHER claims. WHAT WHAT WHAT

@39 I realize how unlikely it is that you have any human friends, and how much more unlikely that any such friends would have sufficient intelligence to be able to communicate using words. Too bad. I would love, some day, to hear how you've died. Not your brain or heart, of course. Those've clearly been dead for some years.

Sign a petition in support of Ms Whalen here: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/873/566/3…

@11--I do believe those in the pro-choice movement supports access to all forms of contraception and that it's between a woman and her doctor to decide what's best for her. For some women, it's the IUD. For some women, it's something else.

What this demonstrates is how harmful restrictions on abortion are to poor people (because it's pretty easy for someone who's rich to go to a place where there's no waiting period or restrictions). If you have money, driving 74 miles to a clinic and waiting 24 hours is no big deal. If you're a minimum-wage worker without paid time off, the loss of two days' wages is probably devastating. Not to mention the gas for the car and the hotel room.

@12, I love your idea of a B&B for women in states with waiting periods. I suppose every bit helps.

BTW, I read somewhere that the drugs the woman procured for her daughter are available over the counter in Europe, which is probably how she got them.

I have just started reading" Orange is the New Black". I had no idea that prison time was dealt out to so many in the US; very punitive and sad situation.

Yep, this one is unreal. I too would donate.

Clearly, what PA needs, is another low skilled single mother trying to support another child. That's the moral solution, no doubt.

What I hope is that this makes all the women in PA of childbearing age who think their access to safe legal abortion is protected by the courts, without having to do anything themselves, re-think that and get out and vote on this issue.

Sending a single mom to jail and leaving her teenage daughter alone, while saddling the mom with un-employability going forward (a conviction), is really going to help things a lot. Absolutely brilliant policy.

@25- a car that runs on water. Not quite exactly, but pretty damn close.
http://search.yahoo.com/mobile/s?rewrite…
Why are you so fucking stupid?

It baffles me that you are all wasting your time, emotion, and intelligence on replying to SteattleBlueballs, that miserable repressed self-loathing smug asshole moron. I've read his moronic posts for years. He has no values, no standards, no morals. He is a champion of the rule of law (marriage), when it goes his way; he dismisses the rule of law when it does not. He appeals to Scripture when it agrees with him; he ignores those Scriptures which do not. He talks about logic and rationality when he feels those things support him; at other times, he asserts the primacy of some kind of "gut instinct" as to what is right or wrong (when the majority and the law disagree with his cramped, twisted little views). Like all conservatives, he thinks the way to argue is to make an offensive, specific statement (like "I wouldn't vote for a black man!"), then furiously backtrack until it is recast as a vague truism ("All I was saying that people should vote their conscience!").

You can't argue with that level of ignorant. He'll say anything at all. No values. No morals. No constancy. Why even bother?

@57 - The same reason boxers beat up punching bags. Nobody will ever actually win, the heavy bag won't even put up a decent fight, but we all get a good workout.

Do we need someone like NARAL or NOW to start a fundraiser or can someone just go to indiegogo or wherever and create one for them?

@57; agree.. Baffles me too. Only encourages SB to come and slime more posts.

@60 you're right, but on the other hand "sliming posts" is a pretty good euphemism for something awesome.

Of course it is@61.. How silly of me not to check, then double check and maybe check again that I haven't used words that can mean, or be manipulated to mean, other than what I intended..

@59
Unfortunately, NARAL and NOW are probably waiting to see how this plays out in order to make sure that there aren't any aspects that could come back and bite them.
Politics.

Given a choice between having an unwanted grandchild or spending 18 months in prison and becoming a felon, I would gladly sign up for the prison term.

However, that's not a choice the government should be forcing me or any other mother to make.

I already financially support Planned Patrnthood but would gladly donate to help this poor woman appeal. So Republicans are perfectly okay with working class women going to jail while exercing their right to abortion? Great way to outreach to women.

I would donate, and hate the shitty laws. But honestly, I've got mixed feelings on this one. I get that the abortion was unattainable, or at least would have been very difficult. But she ordered a drug on the internet and gave it to her pregnant, teenaged daughter. Just out of curiosity I googled abortion pills online. The site I looked at was full of misspellings, mangled english and warnings to seek a doctor's supervision. This was really irresponsible, and man, I understand she was desperate, but wow. 18 months is too severe, and won't help, and we should understand this as the consequence of the shitty laws, but this was really irresponsible and I'm having a hard time feeling totally sympathetic. Yes, pregnancy is dangerous too, and single motherhood is the road to poverty, but hell. This makes me want to go out and throw bricks at republican legislators. But dammit, I still feel a bit of disgust for what this lady did.

@11 -- if you think pro-choice (or reproductive rights or whatever you want to call them) activists aren't advocating for IUDs, you're not listening. IUDs and their high efficiency (but high one-time costs) were _constantly_ brought up in the contraception mandate discussion. Bader-Ginsberg specifically cited them in the Hobby-Lobby dissent.
IUDs are strongly advocated for by progressive women's health providers etc.

I _can_ tell you, though, why anti-abortion conservatives don't like it. Because--and I know this is a cliché, but it's still true--the "pro life" movement isn't about life, it's not even about abortions, it's about controlling women's bodies.

ugh. Bader Ginsburg. Getting late here.

I wonder if she would have been jailed for as long of a time if she'd given her daughter some Vicodin or Valium? Controlled substance, not prescribed to her, potential to be abused, potential for harm to the fetus (maybe less with the Valium; I seem to recall that being given in specific circumstances on OB units).

@42 Hey now Venomlash when I refer to SB as Subhuman I'm making a statement fact.

Yes it is true for awhile it amused me to refer to Subhumanblues as a she (it did get under Subhumanblues's skin so yeah I ran with it longer then I should have) and I feel bad about that.

Truth is I don't really know what Subhumanblues is but based on it's statements I know what it is not. Not male, no real man would be so fearful of lesbians let alone the rest of the world. Nor would any female, christ want something done find the woman in charge.

I know Subhumanblues despite it's claims is not a Christian, hell I'm betting it doesn't even know let alone understand the doctrine of whatever church it pretends to adhere to. Subhumanblues has yet to display an understanding of religion beyond that of bumper sticker.

Bringing me to my last point, I call it Subhuman because the evidence to date indicates that it is not human. Should the day arrive that it displays a human trait I'll consider a reevaluation.

@24 -- I've seen that theory floated before, and I'm pretty sure it's over-thinking the issue.

This "culture wars" stuff doesn't have an end point. It's a bait-and-switch -- they get right wingers all riled up trying to enforce their version of "old fashioned" values, and then take all their money while they're not paying attention. Meanwhile, on our side, we spend all our energy fighting to preserve basic human rights that should never be on the table in the first place, and we don't have anything left over to fight for economic justice.

In other words, this patriarchal anti-abortion, anti-contraception stuff happens because a certain reliable voting bloc likes it. Why do they like it? Well, our thread troll provides some clues. Because they are sanctimonious pricks with zero empathy and a serious mean streak. They delight in slut-shaming, poverty-shaming, and generally taking people who are already disadvantaged -- that is, not the "right" sort of people -- and punishing them some more just because they can't fight back.

@72 "This "culture wars" stuff doesn't have an end point. It's a bait-and-switch -- they get right wingers all riled up trying to enforce their version of "old fashioned" values, and then take all their money while they're not paying attention. Meanwhile, on our side, we spend all our energy fighting to preserve basic human rights that should never be on the table in the first place, and we don't have anything left over to fight for economic justice."

That's really astute.

@36, 37

Try to put down your newly legal dope and follow this-

The mother in this story, without any medical training appropriate to her decision, prescribed bought and gave her daughter a drug that caused the young woman to need medical care. That was her crime. She hurt someone else through HER actions, her own daughter.

I didn't renew a lease for a couple whose lifestyle choice I find repugnant. They aren't living on the streets. I didn't hit them or verbally abuse them. I merely informed them they'd need to find another place to live, with 6 weeks notice and good references as to their tenancy.

And I don't seek to change their adult lifestyle choice, criminalize it, make it a reason to excuse violence against them. But I can't support it using MY property. See, if homosexuals wish to war on society, that's their right. But we get to fight back using moral and social standards, choices about with whom we do business and conduct friendships and so on. They get to choose their deviant lifestyle but adults also accept the consequences of those choices.

Similarly, this 16 year old can have sex. She can find and use contraceptives (at her expense) and I don't care that her mother isn't raising her better. Between them, in my opinion. But when they conspire to murder a baby? When the onus for the choices this girl and her mother made is supposed to be borne by others? That's the point at which it becomes the business of the law and others around them.

Comparing my actions and this woman's at parity isn't merely stupid. It's ludicrous.

@67: "Just out of curiosity I googled abortion pills online. The site I looked at was full of misspellings, mangled english and warnings to seek a doctor's supervision."
Welcome to every watch list ever, lol.
But yeah, sketchy and unsafe. In my opinion, it's two steps up from back-alley coat hanger abortions. The emphasis is not on the mother's actions but rather on a society that drives people to take such senseless risks all for the sake of punishing women who have sex before they're ready to be mothers.

Seattleblues feels that when he breaks the law he is a hero, but when other people break the law, they are scum that should be thrown in jail.

Typical "right for me, wrong for thee" moralizing from a dishonest prick.

Not that you even have rental properties to illegally discriminate with anyway. Is the wife Chinese today, or black, and do you own a contracting business today, or is it law school? I always mix up your personas.

@76

"I always mix up your personas" is two ways wrong. The plural of persona is personae. And your sentence should have read "I always make up your personae."

And since English comprehension is apparently not your forte, the point was compared harms. This woman clearly and criminally harmed her own daughter. In my case a fallacious 'right' to live in my property is balanced against my clear right to choose how I use that property. Clear harm to my versus illusory harm to former tenants is easy to balance. For sane (that is, non lefty loony) people.

No thanks necessary. Consider it an act of kindness.

@74: "I didn't renew a lease for a couple whose lifestyle choice I find repugnant. They aren't living on the streets. I didn't hit them or verbally abuse them. I merely informed them they'd need to find another place to live, with 6 weeks notice and good references as to their tenancy."
I'm sure that lunch counter proprietors felt they weren't causing any harm to the blacks they turned away. After all, they weren't starving to death. They just had to find somewhere else to eat.
Let's get to the meat of laws against housing discrimination, including their historical context. Sellers and lessors used to refuse to sell or lease to black families who wanted to live in predominantly white neighborhoods. (In fact, even white families often had to sign an agreement not to sell to colored persons before they'd be allowed to buy the house.) Jews and Hispanics and Asians were similarly barred from living in such communities. The effect was to make minorities second-class citizens as surely as they were under Jim Crow, not through the state's action but through its complicit inaction.

Do you believe that renters, lessors, and sellers of dwellings should be allowed to refuse to rent, lease, or sell to people based on their race? Or their religion? Or their national origin? Does your wife, whom you have said is black, know of your opinions in this regard?

I know what your response is going to be. You'll say that race isn't the same thing as sexual orientation. (Well, really you'll insist that sexual orientation doesn't exist, but we all know you lie like a rug about that.) So? The point is that there is a compelling interest in banning discrimination in publicly-available accommodations sufficient to make it the government's business. What counts as a protected class under anti-discrimination laws is up for debate! Federal law does NOT ban discrimination against people based on sexual orientation or gender identity. Washington State law does. That is why your refusal to renew a lease based on your tenants' lesbian status is not a federal offense, but rather a state-level crime.
Regardless of your opinions, anti-discrimination laws pertaining to housing and accommodations have been upheld multiple times by the Supreme Court. Your actions as described by you CLEARLY violated state law on the matter. Just because you think it should be legal doesn't mean it is. You've previously called on such advocates of civil disobedience to take their lumps for violating a law they protest against; practice what you preach, you hypocrite.

"See, if homosexuals wish to war on society, that's their right. But we get to fight back using moral and social standards, choices about with whom we do business and conduct friendships and so on."
What have homosexuals done to you, besides pay their rent until you booted them out? What have homosexuals done to society, besides ask that people not make pariahs of them for whom they love? Your side seems to have engaged in a preemptive strike against The Gay because you're convinced that they want to turn everyone gay or hump in public or something. It's not a war. It's unprovoked aggression, you Amalekite.

@77: "'I always mix up your personas' is two ways wrong. The plural of persona is personae."
Apart from your own misuse of the English language, you are incorrect in asserting that 'personas' is not a correct pluralization of 'persona'. In fact when discussing multiple social identities or fronts within a single person, 'personas' is actually THE PREFERRED plural form!

per·so·na noun \pər-ˈsō-nə, -ˌnä\
: the way you behave, talk, etc., with other people that causes them to see you as a particular kind of person : the image or personality that a person presents to other people
plural per·so·nae or personas

per·so·na noun \pər-ˈsō-nə, -ˌnä\ (Medical Dictionary)
plural personas
Medical Definition of PERSONA
: an individual's social facade or front that especially in the analytic psychology of C. G. Jung reflects the role in life the individual is playing—compare anima

(Merriam-Webster English Dictionary, bolding mine.)

Please refrain from correcting others on minor or petty points of argument when you are in fact incorrect.

@76 It is even better than that. He actually states in a public forum that he violated the law without regard to the fact that anyone in the WA State AG's office could see it and start the ball rolling on prosecuting him. One trip to the judge and they get the warrants required to pull the posting logs showing IP and timestamp along with a call to the ISP who will helpfully provide a name and address matching that IP at that particular time. Total time spent: about an hour. Case type: Open and shut (and no bother with a plea-bargain since his own words convict him). Like most lower-grade criminals, his mouth (fingers in this case) can get him in a whole lot of trouble.

@74 " She hurt someone else through HER actions, her own daughter."

See, typical conservative asshole who despite his posturing won't take responsibility for refusing that young woman proper abortion services and want to blame the victims of his politics. Must be hard for you to look at yourself in the mirror.

@77: Funny how you fuck up your own grammar when critiquing someone else's. Christ, you can't be correct about anything can you? Have you ever been right about anything by accident?

Since you clearly have not read the story since you continue top be wrong about what happened, who are you to measure the amount of harm inflicted? Have you bothered to look up the very real social and physical harms of carrying a fetus to term? Did you speak to the girl? It must be nice to be so free of integrity that you just make up reality as you go along.

It is funny how you could argue that you just did not renew this fake lease on your fake property just because it is your right as a fake property owner, but you just had to brag about harming other people for the sake of your bigotry.

Oh, and I am not the one making up personas. You write the exact same shit over at Horse's Ass, in the exact same way. Why is it that all internet trolls who do this think that people are too stupid to realize that two different names write the exact same shit in the exact same way? Oh right, because they are really stupid, and think that because they could not see it, no one else could.

This is justice? Let's look at the results. Now society gets to pay for Jennifer Whalen to stay in jail for 18 months ($100,000?), now Ms. Whalen has a criminal record, has lost her job and is separated from her daughter. Where is her daughter living now? Do you think they will be infamous and emotionally scarred for life? We have taken a hard working, functioning member of society and criminalized her. Do you really think she is a menace to society and should be put away at very great expense to the state of Pennsylvania. Judge Gary Norton should be removed from the bench. He is lacking in judgement and clearly has not made the punishment fit the "crime". I will contribute to any fund set up to help her and her daughter.

@82

Grumble and throw around lies all you like. This woman harmed her child. That's really the only salient fact.

As for the rest, it's just you engaging in ad hominem attacks, since reality and truth ate emphatically not on your side.

And lie all you like, I've never written anything at whatever Horsesass might be. But given the name it's perfect for you, Teddy.

@87: Actually, you could argue that the woman's actions HELPED her child. Dealing with off-cycle bleeding and cramps for a week or two is demonstrably less damaging than carrying a child to term even when only considering the physiological stress of pregnancy, never mind the implications of being saddled with motherhood well before she is ready. Now whether her daughter is better off now that her mother is being tossed in the slammer, well, that's an object of debate.
Also, nothing in Theodore Gorath's post is actually argumentum ad hominem. Insults are thrown your way, but his argument is entirely against your statements rather than your character. You and collectivism_sucks share a tendency to cry "ad hominem" while maintaining ignorance of the phrase's actual meaning.

@87: Also, caught you in a lie again. You've previously admitted knowledge of and correctly defined HorsesAss in this SLOG post. You KNOW I can just Google these things, right? I know how to use keywords!

And I gotta say that despite your protestations, this lostinaseaofblue character sure shares a lot of characteristics with you, Seattleblues. It's pretty convincing...

Finally, do you have anything to say about the Washington State law you admittedly violated and the Supreme Court precedent indicating that it's Constitutional? Or your appallingly bad correction of Theodore Gorath's use of 'personas'? Remember: if you can't say anything smart, don't say anything at all.

@90: Why thank you. Sounds crumb-y and uncomfortable though.

It's a little bit of a divergence from the general conversation, but unregistered @23, HERBS are not necessarily a good recommendation here. Herbal remedies have, like any drug, plenty of side effects, and lack the benefit of the rigorous scientific testing that FDA-regulated pharmaceuticals have undergone. The unregulated market for herbal remedies is rife with problems; for example, tests have shown that a large percentage of these drugs are seriously mislabeled. Sometimes they're crammed with fillers, and sometimes they don't contain even a trace of the advertised ingredient. There are beneficial herbs out there, for sure - lots of pharmaceuticals are based on plant-derived compounds - but for the most part the effects of these drugs are not backed up by solid science and their manufacture and sale is almost entirely unregulated. You don't have to buy into all the pharmaceutical industry's advertising and start knocking back pills for every minor ailment you have, but blindly taking herbal supplements for any perceived ill is just as stupid, and treating major medical issues like pregnancy with untested herbs is dangerous. Stop being silly and accept that there are times when western medicine is your friend.

@87 Let's get it clear again asshole, the American Taliban is responsible for refusing that girl proper abortion services. As stated in the article, your kind is responsible for the rise in back alley abortions. You may think that calling you asshole is ad-hominem but it accurately describes someone who blames the very victims of his nasty politics.

Jesus Christ. It's like something from a Thomas Hardy novel. First society has created a situation that would get a woman in a desperate situation, then it punishes the woman for taking desperate steps. Is that what we are now with women's rights? Are we sinking back into the fucking Victorian age here?!

Eighteen months for trying to help her daughter out of a terrible situation when there were no other options. God fucking bless America.

@Supreme Ruler Of The Universe



The American Academy of Pediatrics FINALLY recommends IUDs! IUDs are sadly the most under-utilized for of birth control available. The FDA says you can leave it in for 10 years but Planned Parenthood acknowledges 12 years might be okay.



If I die and I need an autopsy in my 80's, my IUD will be discovered! I should have had it carved for posterity's sake.



Now, to the issue at hand. 1 year in prison for a non-violent first offense is CRAZY!!! Regardless of what that offense is. Children of incarcerated people are forgotten members of our society, as our the children who end up in Foster Care. Very, very sad.



I can tell you, I would do the same thing for my 15 year old daughter, excepting the buying pills off the internet part of it.