Judge Harms Says It's Okay To Order Late Term Abortions

About a month ago, there was a case that went to the Supreme Court in Massachusetts about a family law court judge near Boston who was petitioned by the family of a mentally ill woman in her thirties concerning her pregnancy. The family wanted the woman to be ordered by Judge Harms to have an abortion. The woman was about twenty weeks pregnant at the time. Judge Harms thought an abortion sounded like a good idea, and ordered it, as if it were an order for noncustodial visitation and rotating holidays. Naturally, the woman felt the healthy fetus moving inside of her and did not want labor induced so that a doctor or a nurse practitioner could set the baby down and allow it to die, as per the judge's orders. I wouldn't want that, either. Not that I think mental illness is a great quality for a parent to possess, but who, out in the Land of Reality, is perfect? Where should we draw the line? Alcoholics? Moms who don't make enough money for white picket fences? Should a mom serving time in prison, yet carrying a healthy fetus be aborted just because she'll be in prison while the child needs a mother? Or are there other solutions that don't involve death?

After being ordered by this Nazi throwback of a judge to abort a fetus during her second trimster, the woman decided upon civil disobedience, ( carrying a baby to term should NEVER be civil disobedience) and took family law court to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court sided with her, telling her that her child could live. Thank the Gods.

Back in court on municipal levels, Judge Harms retired early, because fallout from oversteppeing her bounds in such a serious way was too hard for her to face every day. A pregnant woman could face feeling her baby move, then submitting to her baby's death, but the Judge Harms was too cowardly to answer questions or face her constituents about her edict. She was planning to quietly continue to live among us, working as an instuctor at Boston University. Apparantly, no one wanted to sign up for her class, and no one wanted to share the teachers' lounge with her. Boston Universtiy rescinded their employment offer. Now the former Judge Harms feels slighted, and that she should still have had the opportunity to teach! I would certainly not take her class, I would not pay tuition for any of my children to take classes from her, and I can certainly see similar conflicts concerning any scholarship fund. Not many of us would want a young person educated by someone who openly violated not only the constitution, but everything for which we hope to stand, here in America.

"Harms, who retired last month, defended her ruling in a letter she sent Monday to other Massachusetts family court judges, saying she believed the schizophrenic woman would have chosen to have an abortion if she had been mentally competent."....Deborah Becker, WBUR..............Seriously, Judge Harms? You could feel a healthy fetus at four or five months moving inside of you, and deny him or her the opportunity to live? I'm so glad you are not on the bench anymore.

Coming To A Clearance Rack Near You

Maybe my reaction to these Tshirts AND to Boston mayor, Thomas Menino's comments about them is yet another indicator that I am getting old. Nike has a store in Boston, and in the window of that store, are some Tshirts with messages like "Get High", and other pro recreational drug slogans. Oh well........I've been there, done that...not going back, at least not today. And those are not messages I would wear on my clothing, either. But at the same time, America has the First Amendment, which grants anyone the right to wear a Tshirt with the words, "Get High" on it just as much as it grants anyone the right to wear a baseball cap with the words, "Pabst Blue Ribbon" on it. If alcohol is a drug, as per the most current, politically correct psycho-babble, I can only conclude that they both send the same message. How this helps Nike in it's original quest to sell ATHLETIC shoes and gear, only the shadow knows......but they do not have to take the Tshirts out of the window unless they want to.

Here is Nike's response to the whole thing:
In a statement to CNN, Nike said: "These t-shirts are part of an action sports campaign, featuring marquee athletes using commonly used and accepted expressions for performance at the highest level of their sport, be it surfing, skateboarding or BMX. Nike does not condone the use of banned or illegal substances."

Now;  if my healthy, growing, and appropriately rebellious and authority-questioning kids lived in Boston, they would probably, at their earliest convience, make a trip over to the Nike store to buy these goofy Tshirts, after hearing their mayor whine about them. Knowing that an authority figure hates something makes it all the more attractive to young people, so Mayor Menino probably saved these Tshirts from an early trip to the clearance rack. Maybe he owns stock in Nike, who knows? But seriously......the messages on these shirts are just the product of an artistic dry spell somewhere in Nike's idea box, and are also kind of ugly. They were destined for the clearance rack, anyway. Why flip out over them, and create a counter reaction?