Reply #110: Damn right the judge is right!

[sunnybrook]

I am a pro-choice feminist. However, that does not mean that what is best for a child is secondary. I don't think that people who are agreeing with the judge are necessarily going down the slippery slope, blah, blah, blah... It seems to me that as a country we talk the talk about children's rights but do not back it up. It is ridiculous to simply atrribute this to poverty or even addiction. If she has more children she has shown that they are not going to be protected in her care and I am of the opinion that the state has a MORAL responsibility to protect children from neglect and abuse. All of the things about her situation are not known, but it would be utter stupidity to continue with this pattern. I am not disputing that perhaps there are enormous burdens she is dealing with and I am not some nutjob Conservative. I am for children's rights first and foremost. The judge has left open the possibility for her to get her children back and continue procreating in the future. She is just saying she will not allow more lives to be destroyed in the meantime. Some issues are not so black and white and have gray areas. This is not anti-choice government control of women's bodies. The people who have said that children do not have guaranteed rights may be correct technically; but they SHOULD.