A Tanning Booth or an Abortion – Which Harms a Girl More?

I read with interest that New York State law currently prohibits children under fourteen years of age from using indoor tanning booths, and that teens from fourteen to seventeen years of age require a parent’s permission. It was even more interesting to read that New York is now seeking to completely ban those under sixteen from using indoor tanning booths. So if a fourteen-year-old girl walks into a tanning salon and asks for a tan without a parent’s permission, she is turned away. But if that same girl should enter a Planned Parenthood clinic and request an abortion, she may legally receive an abortion and her parents not only don’t need to give permission but do not even have to be notified afterwards. What logic is there in our laws whereby a girl cannot receive a tan, an ear-piercing, or an aspirin from a school nurse without a parent’s permission, but she can have an abortion?

Even though tanning salon owners claim that when properly used, tanning salons are not harmful, the government feels the need to protect young people who may not understand the potential dangers of getting an artificial tan before the prom from their lack of information by banning them from using tanning salons. But the same girl who is pregnant, frightened, is not thinking about the serious medical, psychological, and spiritual dangers associated with abortion – including death – without being required by law to receive any information whatsoever as to what the procedure entails and how it may affect her physically or otherwise, is deemed by the government fully competent to make a rational, informed decision without the input of her parents. Something is very wrong here.

The pro-abortion forces are continually talking about “pro-choice” and helping a woman make the best choice for her. But to make a clearly proper choice, does she not need to have all the information necessary to weigh the pros and cons of an abortion and decide what is the best option for her? And when a teenage girl is pregnant and frightened, is this not more than ever a time where she needs the support and input of her parents to help her make the choice that is best for her? How could we logically ban a suntan but permit an abortion? There is only one possible reason why Planned Parenthood opposes Parental Notification  and Informed Consent – the parents may not permit her to have an abortion, or the girl may choose to have her baby instead. It is now amply evident that “pro-choice” is a lie. Planned Parenthood and their similar groups are interested in only one thing – seeing how many abortions they can get performed.

3 thoughts on “A Tanning Booth or an Abortion – Which Harms a Girl More?

  1. Malcom Bentley says:

    Indoor tanning is an environment that can be controlled. Both tanning beds and the sun give off ultra violet light, but as in the case of tanning beds, the C light waves which is considered to be most damaging are filtered. In addition, tanning bulbs emit UVA and UVB in which excessive exposure can be risky, that is why precisely tanning beds are considered safer because exposure can be controlled. .

    Our favorite blog site

    • Thank you for the information. I find it further boosts my argument. If a tanning salon, which can be controlled, according to some still requires parental permission, then all the more should parental permission be required for an abortion, which is a full surgical procedure. I find it inconsistent to support a ban tanning booths but allow abortion.

  2. […] his wit to good use, his letters frequently appear in The Journal News. Last month, he wrote a blog post which pointed out the the logical inconsistency of New York State law. In New York, a 16-year-old […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s