What are the Abortion procedures that both Texas and California have and what are the ages of both states?
460883
call the Planned Parenthood offices. I am sure they can give you all the info you need
786265
I think you have to ask yourself - are you talking about a CA state policy or a county policy or a school district's policy?\n\nOnce you narrow that down, you might want to ask again (and don't require it to be popular - that makes people think they have to agree to it, and there is lots going on in CA that we don't necessarily like).\n\nAll I could think of is laws, not policies - like the ability for mothers to drop off their babies within the first day to hospitals etc. so that there are fewer babies killed or left for dead...\n\nHope this helps.
699808
I don't know, but the Web site below might help. It's a Q&A about court requests to terminate parental rights. It would also seem a child 12 or older can object to the proceedings.
1155252
If the Repubs think that "killing babies" (abortions) is bad, why do they think it is okay to send young boys and girls to their death in a meaningless war?  I guess 18 is the cut off age for murder, huh?  Don't kill babies, kill fresh, 18 year old adults.
346591
They cannot be purchased in California at any age.\n\nCheck the laws regarding each state. Usually 18 years of age for any long gun.
113952
Whoa, cowboy...just a point of order here, to keep someone out of trouble.  The whole "over 16" thing may be true in some states, but nobody here should think it applies in California.\n\nBecause it ain't so.\n\nIn California, you must be 18 and older to legally have sex.  Does not matter who consents to what.  End of story.\n\nMy apologies to the asker...this is not an answer to the original question and I probably should be made to forfeit two points just for doing it.\n\nOkay, let's look at the question:\n\nHmph.  Does not say what I thought it did.  In court, this question would be responded to with this; "Objection.  Assumes facts not in evidence."\n\nIn other words, the asker of this question is stating as fact that a man who sleeps with another man's wife (with her consent) can be charged (with what we do not know, but we'll assume a crime).  Therein lies the "fact" which is not in evidence yet.\n\nIn California, it never will be.  Two consenting adults can do doggone near anything they want to in California...the more I think of it, when it comes to sex they *can* do anything they want, as long as both (all?) agree.  \n\nSo the question, at least in my state, is flawed.  It states that a man can be charged for humping someone else's wife and that isn't true.  Therefore, a woman wouldn't be charged with humping someone's husband for the same reason...it's legal in this state.\n\nEven further, now that I think about it:\n\nIf we're talking about legally married spouses, then it's probable that someone could legally have sex at an age less than 18 in this state.  You can't legally marry until you are 18 OR with...umm...something... parental permission or emancipation, I think.  If you're emancipated, you can have sex as far as I know.  Not sure about the parental permission for marriage equalling the right to hump.\n\nBizarre question.\n\nEven more bizzare answer.
130168
Usually depends on the State you live in, your age, how many children you have, financial status, etc. I know that in Oklahoma, if you are on Medicaid (welfare), you can't get your tubes tied until you are 21 years old, no matter the cicumstance (that is if you want Medicaid to pay for it).
904287
No ...\n\n\nhttp://www.divorcenet.com/states/texas/txart18
450090
Jewish Law only sets general guidelines, while specific rulings depend on INDIVIDUAL cases.  There is no one rule fits all.\nThe fetus is not a living person according to Jewish Law, and in the first 40 days after conception is considered nothing more than a membrane.\nThere are a variety of halachic opinions on the subject, but generally Judaism allows abortion if the mother's HEALTH (not just life, but health) is in danger.  There may be other circumstances where a ruling may be lenient, specifically at the very begninning of the pregenancy.\n\nTHe State of Israel allows abortions.  For what they claim are safety reasons, legal abortions must take place in hospitals, though of course some doctors perform abortions in private clinics.\nAn abortion is legal in Israel if the mother is a minor, not married (whether single, divorced, or widowed), for reasons of physical or psychological health, or if there's something wrong with the fetus.  The State pays for abortions for girls 17 and under.
516119
America has had a debate over both issues for many years now.Sentencing persons to death for their crimes has been around for centuries.So has the practice of abortion dating back 5000 years or more.The whole debate is based on ones own morale beliefs.There lies the debate the struggle between the beliefs of individuals.It is a very hard decision to enforce the moral beliefs of one on another individual. If society as a whole can come to a consensus that no form of death of human life is acceptable or a that terminating a life is acceptable in abortion or in capital punishment.I wont insert my beliefs here but I do agree that there is a contradiction between the two.One human life needs to be viewed equally to another.
800853
Disgusting and barbaric.  I am pro choice.  I am even more pro choice up until the 2nd trimester.  Once the first trimester is over, abortion should no longer be a topic of interest.
654379
There is a web site service that helps with that.  It is called VitalRec.  Here is the website for California.  Good luck.\n\nhttp://www.vitalrec.com/ca.html
288533
No, that's a cop-out by the U.S. Supreme court. But it won't be for long. South Dakota state Senate voted, 23 to 12, to criminalize abortion in their state. It'll get challenged, I guarantee it.
591830
The first answerer to your question is correct and below are links to specific information regarding the laws and processes of divorce for the state of Texas ....\n\nhttp://womansdivorce.com/texas.html#LAW\n\n\nhttp://www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/fatoc.html
146777
Neither, I'm in the middle on this issue.  It's a shame most people don't know there's a middle ground.\n\nYou said something original.\n\nOK, why?: To say a single cell should be granted the rights of a human person is probably one of the most absurd things I've ever heard.  On the other hand, to say it's OK to kill a 7 month old fetus that is little different from a new-born is just as absurd.\n\nMiddle ground can be achieved when we realize what it means to be human... to think (at least to the point that you might care if you were aborted or not). That is why I believe we should limit abortion to 22 weeks - the time of the development of the neo-cortex.
521164
Official website: \nhttp://www.supremecourtus.gov/\n\nThese websites discuss the supreme court decisions on abortion:\nhttp://www.godandscience.org/abortion/sld019.html\nhttp://www.unitedforlife.org/court_decisions.htm\n\nThis website discusses the current situation:\nhttp://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/jul/05072001.html
1046713
Back before 1973 (Roe vs. Wade), states could legalize / not legalize aspects of abortion, and under what circumstances they could be performed. So for instance, here in Maryland, there were about 6,000 abortions performed in 1972, under review board process that considered aspects of each pregnancy.\n\nSince Roe v Wade, the 9 justices on the Supreme court 'discovered' it was a constitutional right guaranteed by the USA Founding Fathers, -to have an abortion. States therefore can not supersede this newly found constitutional 'right'.\n\nSo yes, abortion is legal in North Carolina, as it currently is in all 50 states.