General discussion of silly shit you read about team USA.
Apparently the appropriate way to react to adolescent show-me-yours-I'll-show-you-mine is to sexually assault the boy.Alternet wrote:Police Obtain Warrant to Take Pictures of Teenage Boy's Erect Penis
Virginia prosecutors say the 17-year-old 'sexted' his 15-year-old girlfriend, and for that he must be punished.
The teenager faces charges stemming from an alleged instance of receiving sexting pictures from his then 15-year-old girlfriend. Prosecutors say that they have video of the boy's erect penis that was sent to the girl's cell phone. If convicted, the boy could see prison time and be forced to register as a sex offender, according to the Washington Post.
An attorney representing the 17-year-old, Jessica Harbeson Foster, claims she was told that the police would just take him "down to the hospital, give him a shot and then take the pictures that we need.â€
â€œThe prosecutorâ€™s job is to seek justice,â€ Foster told the Post. â€œWhat is just about this? How does this advance the interest of the Commonwealth? This is a 17-year-old who goes to school every day, plays football, has never been in trouble with the law before. Now heâ€™s saddled with two felonies and the implication that heâ€™s a sexual predator. I donâ€™t mind trying the case. My goal is to stop the search warrant. I donâ€™t want him to go through that. Taking him down to the hospital so he can get an erection in front of all those cops, thatâ€™s traumatizing.â€
It's interesting that 'conservatives' (read: reactionaries) feel that unborn life is sacred but as soon as the kid takes a breath it is no longer worthy of consideration. No socialised healthcare for you child but we will imprison you for minor indiscretions. We're hard on 'crime' here.Alternet wrote:Who Owns Your Womb? Women Can Get Murder Charge for Refusing C-Sections
Decades ago, refusing to undergo cesarean surgery was not a crime. Thatâ€™s another matter now in the wake of recent "fetal protection" enactments that make it a crime for a pregnant woman to engage in any conduct that might threaten harm to a fetus. Some doctors believe this applies to how a woman gives birth.
Melissa Rowland refused to undergo the cesarean surgery recommended by her doctor. She was later charged with murder after one of her fetuses was stillborn. Rowland accepted a plea deal, which made her criminally liable for child endangerment.
Three years ago Rinat Dray vehemently protested against the administration of a cesarean section in the birth of her third child. Throughout her pregnancy, she had prepared for a vaginal delivery after prior cesarean, or VBAC. However, on that July evening, according to a lawsuit filed by Dray, hospital staff overrode her refusal to submit to a cesarean. Hospital documents record Drayâ€™s refusal, and also her physicianâ€™s decision to ignore that order. In a handwritten statement attached to her file, her doctor informed hospital staff that â€œI have decided to override her refusal to have a C-section.â€ Soon thereafter, doctors removed Drayâ€™s third child by c-section.
The increase in c-section births overlaps with the rise in fetal protection efforts and the dramatic increase in legislation to chip away at reproductive liberty. Between 2011-213, more than 300 laws have been enacted to undermine womenâ€™s abortion rights. More anti-abortion legislation was enacted in the last two years than collectively in the 10 years prior. At the same time, states have enacted laws criminalizing pregnant womenâ€™s conduct that might pose a risk of harm to their fetuses. Keeping with this trend, the state of Tennessee recently enacted a law making it a crime to be a pregnant drug addict. These legislative movements create the conditions under which doctors claim not only medical, but also legal and moral authority over their pregnant patients to protect fetal interests.
Consider the case of Lisa Epsteen. In 2013, when Epsteen indicated that she wanted to wait two additional days for a vaginal delivery rather than undergo the cesarean section recommended by Dr. Jerry Yankowitz, chairman of the University of South Floridaâ€™s department of obstetrics and gynecology, he sent the mother of five an email, warning: â€œI would hate to move to the most extreme option, which is having law enforcement pick you up at your home and bring you in, but you are leaving the providers of USF/TGH no choice.â€ Fearful that police would soon surround her home, Epsteen contacted her lawyers.
Epsteenâ€™s experience is hardly isolated. At another Florida hospital, Tallahassee Memorial, doctors held Samantha Burton against her will and sought a court order to forcibly remove her fetus. A local judge granted the order, imposing indefinite confinement, resulting in the pregnant mother of two being held against her will in a solitary hospital room for three days until her fetus was surgically removed.
In Burtonâ€™s case, law and medicine intersected in pernicious ways, extending even beyond the physicianâ€™s decision to seek an order to confine Burton against her will. Burton was not provided any legal representation at the civil commitment hearing, despite the significant liberty interests at stake. No counsel appeared to address these concerns (and others) until after the forced cesarean section occurred.
In a dramatic case involving a pregnant cancer patient, Angela Carder, doctors denied her request for chemotherapy in order to preserve the health of her fetus. Doctors overrode Carderâ€™s objections and forcibly removed her fetus through cesarean surgery. The baby died in two hours. Carder died two days later.
In other cases, pregnant women have escaped US hospitals and fled to other states to give birth or delivered at home in order to avoid forced removal of their fetuses.
- General Mackevili
- The General
- Posts: 17449
- Joined: Tue May 06, 2014 5:24 pm
- Reputation: 2347
- Location: The Kingdom
"Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh."
Have a story or an anonymous news tip for CEO? Need advertising? CONTACT ME
Cambodia Expats Online is the most popular community in the country. JOIN TODAY
Follow CEO on social media:
- The Pun-isher
- Posts: 6077
- Joined: Mon May 12, 2014 6:51 pm
- Reputation: 185
- Location: The Kremlin
The political (and judicial) issues at hand currently aren't corporate personhood, but a matter of which rights accorded to natural persons should be extend to them as well. The decisions stem from the concepts the by denying the rights to the incorporated body you are also restricting the rights of the members of that body... because corporations aren't run by robots... they're run by people. Especially in the case of closely held corporations.
An absurdly extreme example of this, but a good illustration, would be a law that all corporations must ensure that their CEO eats pork once a week. This would make any person of Islamic or Orthodox Jewish beliefs be forced to choose between their religious beliefs and entering into industry, and would be in violation of the concepts of freedom of religion.]
- Posts: 1255
- Joined: Sat May 17, 2014 6:14 am
- Reputation: 3
- Location: Soon, Soon There
America the land of the not so free has more people in jails/prisons per capita than any other country on earth. Jails/prisons in America are a corporate growth industry and are power and control for the "shadow government" the bar associations. I hadn't had as much as a parking ticket in 43 years when the police tried to kill me (there was a witness so they couldn't shoot me and put a gun in my hand) and threw me in jail for a bogus restraining order that was never properly issued to me and was made out to another person. Because I sued the police in federal court (they brought in a retired judge that was dying to dismiss the case and he died two weeks later) the police once again tried to kill me. (lots of witness's this time so they failed.)
The only way that I will go back to AmeriKa is when the "America Spring" starts. I only hope I live long enough to see it and/or am not to old to participate. Its not a matter of IF, its WHEN.
In America The 14th Amendment was implemented after the civil war to grant personhood to former slaves but the vast majority of cases that were subsequently brought before the court were in regard to corporations. I don't deny that allowing artificial persons some legal rights is a good idea, it is a convenience in the business world, but trying to extend their status so that they can enjoy rights and protections under the law to the same degree as real people is ridiculous.OrangeDragon wrote:Corporate Personhood has existed since the 1800s... and is far from only an American Phenomenon. In fact the US adopted the concepts much later than the UK, Australia, etc. In UK law look up 'juristic person' or 'legal person' and you'll note that it doesn't specify a restriction on it being a natural person.
Strawman. It doesn't matter if you're a CEO, shareholder, employee or contractor in that fantasy.OD wrote:An absurdly extreme example of this, but a good illustration, would be a law that all corporations must ensure that their CEO eats pork once a week. This would make any person of Islamic or Orthodox Jewish beliefs be forced to choose between their religious beliefs and entering into industry, and would be in violation of the concepts of freedom of religion.]
What do you think of the Hobby Lobby case?
Here's an example of a double standard enforced by the court. Apparently Americans have the right to bully people seeking abortions but cannot practice the 1st amendment rights in front of the highest court in the land.
The Supreme Court Enjoys a Much Bigger Buffer Zone than the One It Just Took Away from Abortion Clinics
The thing about things like the second example, although extreme, is that in a lot of instances, it's the public who have campaigned for some iffy laws. Grieving parents, for example, are always campaigning for laws against some freak instance that killed their loved ones. And of course, if you make killing foetuses illegal ( which sounds just) , then it opens the doors to cases like the one quoted.
- Similar Topics
- Last post
- 49 Replies
- 7274 Views
Last post by fatuousdrivel
- 31 Replies
- 3366 Views
Last post by Imnotasiain
- 6 Replies
- 1872 Views
Last post by Pragmatist
- 1 Replies
- 1966 Views
Last post by finbar
- 0 Replies
- 572 Views
Last post by phuketrichard
- 178 Replies
- 15703 Views
Last post by newkidontheblock
- 1 Replies
- 1294 Views
Last post by prahocalypse now