Slog

News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

Thursday, May 21, 2009

Every Child Deserves a Mother and a Father

Posted by Dan Savage on Thu, May 21, 2009 at 9:47 AM

Pennsylvania:

A Pennsylvania man is in jail on charges he tried to kill the fetus of a 17-year-old girl by helping two teenage boys put an abortion-inducing cow hormone into her drink. Forty-six-year-old Jonathan Imler, of Williamsburg, was charged and jailed in Blair County on Tuesday.

Police say the girl's 16-year-old boyfriend, who is the father of the child, another 17-year-old boy and Imler stole the hormone ProstaMate from a farm.

Share via

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Newsvine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Email
 

Comments (21) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
1
Jeezus, there are a lot of incredibly scummy people in the world.
Posted by Patti on May 21, 2009 at 9:52 AM
Our Lady Of Guadalupe 2
But at least they can still get married... Cuz, you know, it's not about love or anything, it's about being a man and a woman...
Posted by Our Lady Of Guadalupe on May 21, 2009 at 10:02 AM
Jenny from the Block 3
Is this one of the consequences of pregnancy Bristol was talking about?
Posted by Jenny from the Block on May 21, 2009 at 10:10 AM
lark 4
Good Morning Dan,
Speaking of bad(?) parents, checkout this medical phenom:
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/30864533/?…

Wow. Ms. Washington is quite fecund and quite active. She’s 20 y/o and the father of one of the twins and the expectant daughter is 44 y/o. In addition, she has a 4 y/o. Medically, it is fascinating. But, practically, it is problematic. I wish them luck. They’ll need a lot of it.
Posted by lark on May 21, 2009 at 10:22 AM
You_Gotta_Be_Kidding_Me 5
How can you "kill" something that isn't "life"? I thought the Slog consensus was that fetus's are just tumors? Why is it when the father exercises his "choice" its all the sudden murder?
Posted by You_Gotta_Be_Kidding_Me on May 21, 2009 at 10:53 AM
Mattini 6
Sheesh, how many teenage boys does it take to slip an abortion-inducing cow hormone into a girl's drink?
Posted by Mattini on May 21, 2009 at 11:11 AM
7
@5-- Its not murder to kill a fetus, but it IS a very serious assault and battery on the pregnant woman (if done without her consent).
Posted by vitaminwater on May 21, 2009 at 11:13 AM
8
@5 A fetus is an incredible potentiality. It's not a human being. All the same, you don't harm it for no reason, and you definitely don't harm it without the woman's consent. At the very least, it's part of her body, and thus counts as assault.

Pro-choice doesn't automatically mean pro-abortion. There's a big difference.
Posted by lymerae on May 21, 2009 at 11:17 AM
9
The choice we speak of is - THE CHOICE OF THE WOMAN.

Period. Her body, her choice.

After birth, bio fathers have very strong rights should they decide to exert them. And some do, to the anger of the moms.
Posted by Had my Coffee on May 21, 2009 at 12:05 PM
10
@5 Even tumors are not removed without the consent of the victim/patient you fuckwitt.
Posted by Take it all in on May 21, 2009 at 12:47 PM
kresblamania 11
Sperm and eggs are alive. When they get together that's alive too. There is no stage where the thing is dead. It's not a person yet, but it's alive just like your other cells and organs.
Posted by kresblamania http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiI9Uc1uVtc on May 21, 2009 at 1:09 PM
12
Why is a fetus not a "human being"? It has all the genes of a human, all the cellular activity of a human. How is it not a human being? And the "not viable outside the womb" argument doesn't work. That would mean anyone in an ICU being kept alive by a respirator is no longer a human being.
Posted by Westside forever on May 21, 2009 at 1:33 PM
13
@12 But those people are already outside of the womb. They have already been viable sans womb. They are not dependent upon those machines to grow into a viable stage of human formation in which to exist beyond the womb. They are not dependent on the body/biology/life of another human being in order to live. They are not having an immediate physiological, biological and psychological effect on another person.
Posted by Take it all in on May 21, 2009 at 2:02 PM
14
@12 Also, note that a fetus is a human, by definition (it contains human DNA), but not a human being. The term "being" implies independent physiological existence outside of a pregnant woman. A fetus is a potential human being. A good analogy I have heard is that "a fetus is a potential human being, just like an acorn is a potential oak tree. It contains all of the DNA of an oak tree, but it is not an oak tree."
Posted by Take it all in on May 21, 2009 at 2:13 PM
15
@ 12 If you're going that route, why is an embryo not a "human being"? It has all the genes of a human, and the full capability to grow into a human. All organs have begun to form.

Why is a blastocyst not a human being? It has all the genes of a human, all the potential future of a human. It has already implanted into the uterus wall. And as you pointed out, you don't care whatsoever that it's not viable outside the womb.

For that matter, why is an unfertilized ovum not a human being? It has a complete copy of a human genome, minus the extra X/Y chromosome. Shouldn't it be considered human? Shouldn't every menstrual period be considered murder?

Indeed, 25% of all pregnancies end in spontaneous abortion (aka miscarriage) before week 6, including the vast majority of embryos with genetic defects. We don't even know how many women are naturally guilty of abortion, unknowingly, due to the natural processes of their own bodies!

I choose to define the moment a fetus becomes a human being as at birth, for ethical and religious reasons. Otherwise, logically, a miscarrying woman would be guilty of involuntary manslaughter. You, of course, can choose differently.
Posted by lymerae on May 21, 2009 at 2:16 PM
16
I thought the point of these posts was to show that straight parents are often worse than gay parents. But I don't see the logic here. I'm assuming, since the father tried to abort the baby, that this was an unplanned pregnancy. Since gay parents cannot have unplanned pregnancies, this situation couldn't possibly occur with gay parents. BTW this is my first Slog comment ever.
Posted by Guy in Boston on May 22, 2009 at 6:10 AM
17
Guy in Boston: Ummm, so ... you don't think that the father who attempted to abort his daughters fetus without her permission was not abusing said daughter? Therefore acting as an irresponsible parent? Because I would say that is some straight up fucked up shitty abusive parenting right there. And on another note ... if she got pregnant @ age 15 ... he pretty much failed as a parent by not teaching her about sex.
Posted by Take it all in on May 22, 2009 at 9:38 AM
18
@17 The article doesn't say anything about the guy who was charged being the girl's father. I was talking about her boyfriend when I said father. Anyway my point was that her boyfriend (the father) was reacting to a situation (the unplanned pregnancy) that only happens to straight people. So gay people really have no place to get all holier-than-thou. Not that it's not completely fucked up to do what he did.
Posted by Guy in Boston on May 22, 2009 at 11:48 AM
19
BTW I don't mean that no gay person is allowed to say that this is wrong. It just doesn't advance Dan's cause as well as his other posts entitled Every Child Deserves a Mother and a Father.
Posted by Guy in Boston on May 22, 2009 at 11:56 AM
Allyn 20
Awww, teens and their pranks… makes me nostalgic for the good old days...
Posted by Allyn on May 22, 2009 at 2:09 PM
21
Guy in Boston: You're totally right, it doesn't say that ... wow, I feel like a dumbass, sorry about that. I don't even know where that idea entered my head. I see your point now.
Posted by Take it all in on May 22, 2009 at 2:40 PM

Add a comment

 

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use