The difference, my boy, is one accusation is based on fact the other is pure libel. The promoters of the killing and dismemberment are being attacked on the basis of their belief that that such activities are "personal choices." The proabortionists have taken a public position which they can and should be called on. The crap about blow up dolls is pure fiction. If you can't see the difference then you are part of the problem in this world.
And how would your kind dispose off a problem like me??
I am not sure what you mean? As for the term "my boy" it is not an epithet. Is there some reason you jumped to that conclusion? Just looking for an opportunity to smear someone?
A little prespective here. Luv2Fly's suggested 'middle ground' is pretty much what we have now. I would agree with that - the old trimester system, if you will, with refinements dictated by medical advancements. Not a problem.
Let's explore this 'religious' viewpoint for a moment. In the beginning, men thought that women played no part in reproduction other than that of a vessel for the man's seed. And both she and the child were chattels of the man. Naturally, since HE was created in the image of GOD and women, obviously, were not. The Bible holds these views since it was written by men in that time. Naturally they were going to toe the party line since that line was favorable to them. Those who have the power make the rules. Women using contraception or abortion or infanticide to control the number and spacing of children were therefore 'acting up' - chattel being property you will remember. Well, you can't have property making decisions now can you? This is the basis for jethro's, et al, position. SHE is denying HIS seed the use of HER body.
You may disagree all you wish, but those are generally the facts of the case. Look it up. It also explains why some are willing to bomb and shoot those who are pro-choice and NO, JETHRO, it ain't just semantics.
to gettin' personal again. It was a QUESTION, kit. Don't you know the difference?It isn't your decision to make. It is a moral decision and people have a right in this country to discuss and promote moral values. You apparently don't believe in either of those things.
have you stopped beating your wife yet? Do you always speak out of your ass? JUST because it is a question does NOT mean it isn't a personal attack.
You can be as 'moral' as you wish; what you CANNOT do is DICTATE to others, jethro. Feel free to continue on with your zealotry and hystrionics. Your opinion will count just as much as any other male's.
With 2000 years of history to overcome and atone for, your 'morality' has quite a job ahead of it.
You can be as 'moral' as you wish; what you CANNOT do is DICTATE to others, jethro. Feel free to continue on with your zealotry and hystrionics. Your opinion will count just as much as any other male's. It counts as much as yours. Women do not have a monopoly on the issue. It is a question of morality. Someone has to counteract the selfishness of the pro abortion lobby.
With 2000 years of history to overcome and atone for, your 'morality' has quite a job ahead of it Your biased thoughtless point of view just shows your ignorance. Just because you can point to a few high profile incidents of misbehavior by some does not change the great good my "morality" has done throughout history. It is better having some morality, although it's name has been misued by some, rather than having none at all. You and your ilk support butchery nothing less. Therefore you deserve no respect. Furthermore, it is amazing that simply because I discuss how brutal abortion procedure I am attacked as the evil one.
High profile incidents? Pray tell. The fact that Christians put more people to death than the Romans in their Empire? Fighting between Christians over what really can only be called nonsense? The thing with the pederast priests has been going on for centuries now so no one should be surprised. After all, if you slam women enough - to whom else were you planning to turn? The Church's views on women have been foul from the start and have only recently begun to change for the better so do not preach to me about your vaunted morality.
You have locked your brain into a box and feel so enboldened by this that you attack as being immoral everyone who does share your prediliction for encasement.
Well you can try to prove that but the records for doing so aren't very good.After all, if you slam women enough - to whom else were you planning to turn? What could this nonsense possibly mean?The Church's views on women have been foul from the start and have only recently begun to change for the better so do not preach to me about your vaunted morality. Poor little victim.
The Romans kept excellent records - administration was their only real talent, you see. Well, you would if you ever actually studied anything. As to what my statement could possibly mean - are you really THAT dull that you cannot recognise a comprehensive indictment of your mental abilities? As for swallowing whole a pack of lies, pray, sir, why would anyone need to dismember what could more easily be merely sucked out? The first trimester is nothing that requires so much effort. Perhaps the second but remembering the size of my children at that time, dismemberment would not have been required then either. Talk about swallowing a pack of lies!! And what do you know about being pregnant anyway? Tell me how it was for you? Did you gain much weight?
"The Romans kept excellent records - administration was their only real talent, you see."
They did have some philosophers. Poets, artists. Architects and builders. Big deal! Their only contribution to Western Civilization was bean counting.
This reminds me of the scene from Monty Python's "Life of Brian" where the People's Front of Judea were saying "What have the Romans ever done for us."
Sanitation?
The roads?
Safe to walk the streets and night.
Wine?
"All right -- besides cleanliness, roads, public order and wine, what have the Romans ever done for us?
So the PFJ wanted all the Romans out of Judea, EXCEPT for those involved in sanitation, law enforcement, construction and vineculture.
I do hope you have been enjoying the show thus far. But I must admit jethro is too easy. He's also boring but that can't be helped since it is not in him to be witty. Also the culture bedlam was referring to was mainly Greek and was imported wholesale. Any group of people who named their child 'Fifth' is not really up there in culture.
Jethro wants exact figures quoted. I am not an archealogist, jethro, go ask them. The simple truth is that the ancient Romans didn't really give a damn about religion as we know it - that was for women. They concerned themselves with taxes, roads, sewers, underfloor heating systems and so on. Very prosaic. But they did kill people on a grand scale - not because of their religion, but because they didn't pay their taxes, broke various laws, rioted and so on.
And speaking of historical FACT does not make me any kind of NAZI - Lord, what an ignorant man!
You have a point. It seems that conversion from Pagan Rome to Christian Rome was probably more political than it was inspired.
"They concerned themselves with taxes, roads, sewers, underfloor heating systems and so on. Very prosaic."
So, you're saying that the Romans were too preoccupied creating what is essentially an modern functioning community? That seems pretty innovative and creative to me.
You say they should have spent more time squatting on a mushroom? Maybe they felt the Greeks wasted too much time on such indulgences. And the Greeks did their share of warring, too.
But the Greeks loved their beauty. Fascinated with the human form. They must have thought Greece would live forever.
The Romans had work to do. And the outcome lives to this day. By comparison, we have remnants of Greek culture.
Chicago, IL -- The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer reported today that the National Physicians Center for Family Resources has released a CD in which increased breast cancer risk is cited as a long-term medical complication resulting from abortion. The CD is intended to be a resource for parents and health educators to assist them in answering children's questions about puberty, reproduction and sexual health. It says:
"During a normal pregnancy, the female's body produces high levels of the hormone estrogen. This causes the milk producing glands in the breast tissue to become active, a process that is completed during the third trimester of pregnancy. When this change is complete, it helps protect against breast cancer. Elective abortion interrupts these changes in the breast tissue, which makes the cells more likely to become cancerous. Miscarriages generally do not result in a higher breast cancer risk because most pregnancies that miscarry do not produce very high amounts of estrogen."
The National Physicians Center joins other medical organizations in recognizing the weight of the evidence.
Jane Orient, M.D., executive director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, a 40 year old patients' advocacy group which prides itself on its scientific integrity, said that the elevated risk is "substantial, particularly in women who abort their first pregnancy at a young age and who have a family history of breast cancer."
The American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists released its paper evaluating the research earlier this year and said, "Informed consent should be informed. Women deserve the correct information. The evidence (of a link) is strong."
Washington, DC -- Feminists for Life of America launched a nationwide ad campaign to reach women at highest risk of abortion, announced FFL President Serrin Foster. "By the end of this year, four million students at top campuses across the country will hear our pro-woman message: Refuse to Choose.(sm) Women Deserve Better.(sm)"
"One out of five women who has an abortion is a college student -- and the abortion industry knows it. They target vulnerable women who have been abandoned by those they count on the most," said Foster. "We are here to tell them that they are not alone, and there are perfect strangers who will help them and provide unconditional love and support."
Foster is inviting pregnancy care centers across the country to take their Health Clinic Kits directly to the campus clinic. "We know abortion clinic staff markets directly to the clinic on campus. They need to know that nonprofit pregnancy care centers can give women the rest of the choices."
Not only has FFL focused on those at highest risk, but much of the campaign will strategically target students in states with the highest rates of abortion -- California, Texas, New York, Florida and Rhode Island.
The Feminist Majority has targeted Feminists for Life with their "Know the opposition" collegiate campaign. "I hope they do just that. Lots of young women who have never known a day without legalized abortion reconsider it once they see our website or attend a lecture," said Foster.
Planned Parenthood of America's Insider newsletter predicted that FFL's College Outreach Program "could have a profound impact" on college campuses "as well as Planned Parenthood's public education and advocacy efforts."
According to a 1997 Gallup Poll, when women enter college, almost half of them are pro-life. Yet by the time they graduate, nearly three-quarters of college women are pro-choice.
What changes their minds? Students report that by the time the women of this year's senior class graduate they have witnessed pregnant classmates forced to leave schools that do not provide housing for pregnant students, they have cried with their best friends after an abortion, and they have seen parenting students struggle to find childcare so they can attend classes. "We are here to change all that," says Foster.
Foster's lecture, the "Feminist Case Against Abortion" has been receiving rave reviews from students. At her last lecture at the University of San Diego, the front page story in the Vista quoted students who called FFL's message "amazing," "powerful" and "mind blowing." One student told the paper that she "came pro-choice and defensive" but left thinking she may be pro- life.
Foster's speech has also been recognized as one of the 22 "Great Speeches in History" on "Women's Rights." (Edited by Jennifer Hurley, it is one in a series published by Greenhaven Press.)
FFL's College Outreach Program has demonstrated its power to reach college women and men with a message of hope and empowerment and its capacity to be a catalyst for long-term changes on college campuses and beyond.
"Today's students are tomorrow's judges, columnists, reporters, legislators, parents, teachers, activists and voters," said Foster. "It is essential that we reach them now. Planned Parenthood knows it. The Feminist Majority knows it. The good thing is that we know it too, and are taking steps to challenge the status quo. We are taking our bodies back."
Either of them. But all the medicos are saying is that if you have kids, your chances of getting breast cancer are reduced. So those who never have kids share the same risk as those who have an abortion. You do have to know how to interpret those reports. And it is old news too. Heard that from Mom 20 years ago. Now we have a study to confirm it. Lovely. Nice to see that options are available for those in need. But that does NOT equate to utlawing abortions.
Are you in my face? Thought you were on my screen, guy. Spitting spite. No, I am not lying, nor is all I believe a lie. Tis based upon experience, VAST experience. But you do not want to hear about it I am sure. Having been out in the world longer than you and having had a more widely ranging career than you have had, I cannot accept your statement that 'all I believe is a lie'.
I must warn you that making blanket statements like that is not recommended for all it would take to prove such a statement false was one belief that clearly isn't a lie (false). The earth revolves aroudn the sun. There tis done. YOUR statement has been proven false. YOU LIED.
Having been out in the world longer than you and having had a more widely ranging career than you have had, I cannot accept your statement that 'all I believe is a lie'. You could if you tried. But you won't make the effort. But what you believe is almost entirely a lie fueled by hatered of men.
Because you and your philsophy is NOT IMPORTANT enough to even get me to look up the stats. MY position is the law of the land - YOU are among those who have the burden, baby, not I. And if killing is the only basis to your argument that abortion is wrong, well, just think of who does the most killing in this world. Hmmmmmmmm? So just killing is not enough. Sorry but there it is. The individuals who are already here take precedence over those who are not. Period. So rant all you will.
And why won't I amke the effort? You are afraid to make the effort. You will upset your little world if you try because reality, dear, is not in tune with your beliefs.
Because you and your philsophy is NOT IMPORTANT enough to even get me to look up the stats. MY position is the law of the land - YOU are among those who have the burden, baby, not I. You view is immoral. You proabbly hate yourself too because deep down you proabaly know your views are immoral.
I did look up the stats but really I simply cannot be bothered to hunt out the references and look up and then quote to you, jethro dear, the stats. If you want to know what they are, you can go and look them up for yourself. There are libraries that will be more than happy to help you.
Giving a damn whether the unborn live or die and then NOT giving a damn about whether they live or die AFTER they have been born is NOT a moral position, jethro. That is merely self-righteous interference in someone else's business. Coming between a woman and her maker. So go home and mind your own.
I have to actually disagree with Kit and step to the other side for just a moment. Personally, if you hold the belief that even an embryo is equivalent to a fully developed human, and there's never going to be any conclusive evidence against such a notion, then I don't have a problem with someone being against abortion. Naturally I would expect them to consider it a horror and murder and want the practice to come to an end. I would expect someone to sound like Jethro.
But whether abortion is right or wrong isn't exactly the question. The question is should we actually make it illegal? Is a legal ban the solution to the problem? Personally, I don't think so. And what I find hypocritical and distasteful are those people who don't care about the welfare of the mother, or the welfare of the child after it's born. They're happy either seeing the would-have-been mother get punished for choosing an abortion or having the child brought into a world where it's not wanted and won't necessarily be well cared for. To have such callousness, and yet claim one is acting on behalf of human dignity seems to me like outright hypocrisy. Making abortion illegal doesn't solve the problem of abortion at all. All it does it satisfy the bloodlust of the sexually repressed who wish to see women punished for their promiscuity. Real progress does involve choice, and helping women choose life rather than being forced into it.
I did look up the stats but really I simply cannot be bothered to hunt out the references and look up and then quote to you, jethro dear, the stats. You are either incapable of looking or are afraid of what you will find or both.If you want to know what they are, you can go and look them up for yourself. There are libraries that will be more than happy to help you. You made a statement. You should want to know if it is true. But like many liberals you don't care a bout the truth it is only about what you want to believe.
Giving a damn whether the unborn live or die and then NOT giving a damn about whether they live or die AFTER they have been born is NOT a moral position, jethro. Spouting the lie that people that oppose abortion don't care about those already here. That is a damn lie that is not supported by any proof. It is just another example of you saying and believing anything in order to hold on to your outrageous beliefs. You would make a good religious zealot if you were inclined in that direction.That is merely self-righteous interference in someone else's business. No it is about killing unborn children that have already began life's path.Coming between a woman and her maker. So go home and mind your own. Why don't you stop being dishonest with yourself? You believe in a lie.
Those opposed to killing what they see as a human being and what they see as a horrid and wrong pracice are accused of somehow not caring about the mother or child after they were born. Really ? So you have PROOF of that ? Let's see it. And be specific. But for a minute let's say all people who are opposed to abortion don't care about the woman and child after they are born. Well what does that say about the accuser, apparently they don't care about them either, especially the child since they have zero problem sucking it out of the womb. With all the choices availible it seems like the selfish route to me, if you are going to attack the charachter of those opposed to abortion you better look in the mirror, we're not the ones advocating killing a HUMAN fetus inside of the mother.
This other myth about a child having a bad life etc. is just that, a myth and a generalization. Many people who were very unhappy at first to hear the news that they were going to be a parent go on to become great parents with wonderfull kids. A friend of mine was a father at 18, do you think he and his girlfriend were thrilled about being parents ? Hell no, the minute they saw that child they fell in love and today are excellent parents and wouldn't change it for the world. They now have a daughter as well.
The other generalization used is that they will be unwanted, see above for that. But then of course the other option is adoption if they really don't think they can handle it, no problem there's adoption, ask an adopted kid if he's glad he wasn't aborted. There are many well adjusted and productive indidivduals who were adopted. It's one of the other options availible as oppsed to convienently killing it.
People say it's about choice, we have choice. You can choose not to have sex until you get married, you can choose to use birth control if you choose to have sex. If a pregnancy occurs it was still your choice to take the risk knowing it could happen, you then have the choice to keep the child or give it up for adoption. Or take the easy way out.
Luv2Fly 9/25/02 8:44am- a typical Caucasian viewpoint wrapped in an insular mindset and lacking a global perspective. The same arrogance that prompted the Papacy to view the Earth as the center of everything.
You can choose not to have sex until you get married
In impoverished 3rd world countries this is the norm mostly for women - African males are supposed to be more promiscuous. In India for example, outside of the Westernized elite, sex happens for women only after marriage. The men have no such restrictions - the spread of AIDS (heterosexual) is testament to this.
you can choose to use birth control if you choose to have sex
Third world governments have tried with various measures of success. Related to education and to income levels. To many of the impoverished , sex is the only escape. And the right wingers in the US refuse to fund programs that teach birth control methods in the 3rd world.
If a pregnancy occurs it was still your choice to take the risk knowing it could happen, you then have the choice to keep the child or give it up for adoption
An option in the West perhaps - in the slums of Bombay and Calcutta it gets to be even the 10th child. And who has the means for adoption - except rich Western couples - and there is a thriving business in this also. But supply far, far outpaces demand.
Or take the easy way out.
What makes it easy??
Abortion is a required - though tragic - form of birth control in the 3rd world. This debate should not be about abortion in the West alone!!
a typical Caucasian viewpoint wrapped in an insular mindset and lacking a global perspective.
Hey Einstien, what color am I ? You don't know do you so before you open your hate filled yap, think for a moment, try it, you might like it.
The same arrogance that prompted the Papacy to view the Earth as the center of everything.
Yea that would be like Muslim's calling anyone who isn't an infidel. There's arrogance everywhere.
Third world governments have tried with various measures of success. Related to education and to income levels. To many of the impoverished , sex is the only escape. And the right wingers in the US refuse to fund programs that teach birth control methods in the 3rd world.
Yea it's all our fault that somneone is too dumb to figure out......."hmmm, let's see, I have no job, our country is impoverished, we've had famine, drought and war and I have to live off of food donations from those evil people in the U.S, I know I'll keep doing it and have 8 kids, that ought to help my situation" Yea it's all our fault we don't teach them about birth control.
Well Naradar I can't controll who gets elected in India or elsewhere. I can here. So instead of complaining why don't you do something ? No that would be to hard for you, you'd rather complain, it's easier than actually doing something if your so concerned about these people. Typical.
I guess I was being a bit obtuse. It is true that in most poor and middle class ( by income) families , women having sex before marriage is rare.
However, there is no dearth of whores in India. The abject poverty and the lack of status or value for females causes families to even sell girls off into prostitution. Bombay has that infamous red light district. A lot of Indian men have whores as their first sexual experience.
AIDS in India is largely thru heterosexual sex. One example is Indian truckers - on the road for weeks and months. These guys consort with whores and get HIV . The bad part of it is that they come home and give it to their wives also - and the innocent woman is victimized.
Another reason abortion is a legit form of birth control there.
yeah and its a choice whether to obey the law or break the law when it comes to assassinating those who would perform abortions too, yet in your eyes that's acceptable.
yeah and its a choice whether to obey the law or break the law when it comes to assassinating those who would perform abortions too, yet in your eyes that's acceptable.
It would be a choice. That has always been my position. If you even attempt to understand what I write you should be able to understand my position. Instead you ignore what I write. It is either because you do not truly understand my position or you are dishonest. For the record the only thing I wrote is that when someone does kill an abortion provider he should be allowed to use the theory of defense of others in his trial. The jury can accept it or not. I never said the person should not be charged and tried. GOT IT?
Now how would you like someone to tell you "Go play with your blow up doll", Naradar?
pro-abortion extremists should take as good as they give sir. Compared to the shenanigans of the pontificators agaianst abortion , rather mild.
The difference, my boy, is one accusation is based on fact the other is pure libel. The promoters of the killing and dismemberment are being attacked on the basis of their belief that that such activities are "personal choices." The proabortionists have taken a public position which they can and should be called on. The crap about blow up dolls is pure fiction. If you can't see the difference then you are part of the problem in this world.
to me your defence and the accusations against you are equally preposterous. And how would your kind dispose off a problem like me??
and mr. bodine - I am not a negro - the epithet "boy" is therefore misapplied. What is your equivalent for brown person from India?
And how would your kind dispose off a problem like me??
I am not sure what you mean? As for the term "my boy" it is not an epithet. Is there some reason you jumped to that conclusion? Just looking for an opportunity to smear someone?
fold wrote: Geez... I got a grip alright.
And you haven't let go yet!!!!
The only person that appears confused is you, fold. It isn't the early stages of Alzheimers is it?
to gettin' personal again.
It isn't your decision to make.
You play waht's dealt or you fold, OR you have the dealer deal out some more - don't you play poker?
A little prespective here. Luv2Fly's suggested 'middle ground' is pretty much what we have now. I would agree with that - the old trimester system, if you will, with refinements dictated by medical advancements. Not a problem.
Let's explore this 'religious' viewpoint for a moment. In the beginning, men thought that women played no part in reproduction other than that of a vessel for the man's seed. And both she and the child were chattels of the man. Naturally, since HE was created in the image of GOD and women, obviously, were not. The Bible holds these views since it was written by men in that time. Naturally they were going to toe the party line since that line was favorable to them. Those who have the power make the rules. Women using contraception or abortion or infanticide to control the number and spacing of children were therefore 'acting up' - chattel being property you will remember. Well, you can't have property making decisions now can you? This is the basis for jethro's, et al, position. SHE is denying HIS seed the use of HER body.
You may disagree all you wish, but those are generally the facts of the case. Look it up. It also explains why some are willing to bomb and shoot those who are pro-choice and NO, JETHRO, it ain't just semantics.
to gettin' personal again. It was a QUESTION, kit. Don't you know the difference?It isn't your decision to make. It is a moral decision and people have a right in this country to discuss and promote moral values. You apparently don't believe in either of those things.
have you stopped beating your wife yet? Do you always speak out of your ass? JUST because it is a question does NOT mean it isn't a personal attack.
You can be as 'moral' as you wish; what you CANNOT do is DICTATE to others, jethro. Feel free to continue on with your zealotry and hystrionics. Your opinion will count just as much as any other male's.
With 2000 years of history to overcome and atone for, your 'morality' has quite a job ahead of it.
You can be as 'moral' as you wish; what you CANNOT do is DICTATE to others, jethro. Feel free to continue on with your zealotry and hystrionics. Your opinion will count just as much as any other male's. It counts as much as yours. Women do not have a monopoly on the issue. It is a question of morality. Someone has to counteract the selfishness of the pro abortion lobby.
With 2000 years of history to overcome and atone for, your 'morality' has quite a job ahead of it Your biased thoughtless point of view just shows your ignorance. Just because you can point to a few high profile incidents of misbehavior by some does not change the great good my "morality" has done throughout history. It is better having some morality, although it's name has been misued by some, rather than having none at all. You and your ilk support butchery nothing less. Therefore you deserve no respect. Furthermore, it is amazing that simply because I discuss how brutal abortion procedure I am attacked as the evil one.
High profile incidents? Pray tell. The fact that Christians put more people to death than the Romans in their Empire? Fighting between Christians over what really can only be called nonsense? The thing with the pederast priests has been going on for centuries now so no one should be surprised. After all, if you slam women enough - to whom else were you planning to turn? The Church's views on women have been foul from the start and have only recently begun to change for the better so do not preach to me about your vaunted morality.
You have locked your brain into a box and feel so enboldened by this that you attack as being immoral everyone who does share your prediliction for encasement.
Well you can try to prove that but the records for doing so aren't very good.After all, if you slam women enough - to whom else were you planning to turn? What could this nonsense possibly mean?The Church's views on women have been foul from the start and have only recently begun to change for the better so do not preach to me about your vaunted morality. Poor little victim.
The Romans kept excellent records - administration was their only real talent, you see. Well, you would if you ever actually studied anything. As to what my statement could possibly mean - are you really THAT dull that you cannot recognise a comprehensive indictment of your mental abilities? As for swallowing whole a pack of lies, pray, sir, why would anyone need to dismember what could more easily be merely sucked out? The first trimester is nothing that requires so much effort. Perhaps the second but remembering the size of my children at that time, dismemberment would not have been required then either. Talk about swallowing a pack of lies!! And what do you know about being pregnant anyway? Tell me how it was for you? Did you gain much weight?
I know it is to much to expect but be honest and deal with this reality! http://abortionismurder.org/notconvinced.shtml
"The Romans kept excellent records - administration was their only real talent, you see."
They did have some philosophers. Poets, artists. Architects and builders. Big deal! Their only contribution to Western Civilization was bean counting.
This reminds me of the scene from Monty Python's "Life of Brian" where the People's Front of Judea were saying "What have the Romans ever done for us."
Sanitation?
The roads?
Safe to walk the streets and night.
Wine?
"All right -- besides cleanliness, roads, public order and wine, what have the Romans ever done for us?
So the PFJ wanted all the Romans out of Judea, EXCEPT for those involved in sanitation, law enforcement, construction and vineculture.
I loved that part of the movie. :) Wasn't the PFJ that one old guy in the background ?
It was John Cleese and Eric Idle and a couple other people.
Eric Idle's character wanted to be a woman called Loretta.
They only thing the People's Front of Judea hated more than the Romans were the @#%^&#! Judean People's Front.
Now I remember that line LOL. Thanks Rick :) I love Python.
"I want to have a baby!"
Gosh, I gotta get that movie. I haven't seen it in forever.
I do hope you have been enjoying the show thus far. But I must admit jethro is too easy. He's also boring but that can't be helped since it is not in him to be witty. Also the culture bedlam was referring to was mainly Greek and was imported wholesale. Any group of people who named their child 'Fifth' is not really up there in culture.
Jethro wants exact figures quoted. I am not an archealogist, jethro, go ask them. The simple truth is that the ancient Romans didn't really give a damn about religion as we know it - that was for women.
They concerned themselves with taxes, roads, sewers, underfloor heating systems and so on. Very prosaic. But they did kill people on a grand scale - not because of their religion, but because they didn't pay their taxes, broke various laws, rioted and so on.
And speaking of historical FACT does not make me any kind of NAZI - Lord, what an ignorant man!
Kit:
You have a point. It seems that conversion from Pagan Rome to Christian Rome was probably more political than it was inspired.
"They concerned themselves with taxes, roads, sewers, underfloor heating systems and so on. Very prosaic."
So, you're saying that the Romans were too preoccupied creating what is essentially an modern functioning community? That seems pretty innovative and creative to me.
You say they should have spent more time squatting on a mushroom? Maybe they felt the Greeks wasted too much time on such indulgences. And the Greeks did their share of warring, too.
But the Greeks loved their beauty. Fascinated with the human form. They must have thought Greece would live forever.
The Romans had work to do. And the outcome lives to this day. By comparison, we have remnants of Greek culture.
You hold that position you believe it. Apparently you are not willing to see if it is true. You would rather believe than know the truth.
Chicago, IL -- The Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer reported today that
the National Physicians Center for Family Resources has released a CD in
which increased breast cancer risk is cited as a long-term medical
complication resulting from abortion. The CD is intended to be a resource
for parents and health
educators to assist them in answering children's questions about puberty,
reproduction and sexual health. It says:
"During a normal pregnancy, the female's body produces high levels of the
hormone estrogen. This causes the milk producing glands in the breast tissue
to become active, a process that is completed during the third trimester of
pregnancy. When this change is complete, it helps protect against breast
cancer. Elective abortion interrupts these changes in the breast tissue,
which makes the cells more likely to become cancerous. Miscarriages generally
do not result in a higher breast cancer risk because most pregnancies that
miscarry do not produce very high amounts of estrogen."
The National Physicians Center joins other medical organizations in
recognizing the weight of the evidence.
Jane Orient, M.D., executive director of the Association of American
Physicians and Surgeons, a 40 year old patients' advocacy group which prides
itself on its scientific integrity, said that the elevated risk is
"substantial, particularly in women who abort their first pregnancy at a
young age and who have a family history of breast cancer."
The American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists released
its paper evaluating the research earlier this year and said, "Informed
consent should be informed. Women deserve the correct information. The
evidence (of a link) is strong."
Washington, DC -- Feminists for Life of America launched a nationwide ad
campaign to reach women at highest risk of abortion, announced FFL President
Serrin Foster. "By the end of this year, four million students at top
campuses across the country will hear our pro-woman message: Refuse to
Choose.(sm) Women Deserve Better.(sm)"
"One out of five women who has an abortion is a college student -- and the
abortion industry knows it. They target vulnerable women who have been
abandoned by those they count on the most," said Foster. "We are here to tell
them that they are not alone, and there are perfect strangers who will help
them and provide unconditional love and support."
Foster is inviting pregnancy care centers across the country to take their
Health Clinic Kits directly to the campus clinic. "We know abortion clinic
staff markets directly to the clinic on campus. They need to know that
nonprofit pregnancy care centers can give women the rest of the choices."
Not only has FFL focused on those at highest risk, but much of the campaign
will strategically target students in states with the highest rates of
abortion -- California, Texas, New York, Florida and Rhode Island.
The Feminist Majority has targeted Feminists for Life with their "Know the
opposition" collegiate campaign. "I hope they do just that. Lots of young
women who have never known a day without legalized abortion reconsider it
once they see our website or attend a lecture," said Foster.
Planned Parenthood of America's Insider newsletter predicted that FFL's
College Outreach Program "could have a profound impact" on college campuses
"as well as Planned Parenthood's public education and advocacy efforts."
According to a 1997 Gallup Poll, when women enter college, almost half of
them are pro-life. Yet by the time they graduate, nearly three-quarters of
college women are pro-choice.
What changes their minds? Students report that by the time the women of this
year's senior class graduate they have witnessed pregnant classmates forced
to leave schools that do not provide housing for pregnant students, they have
cried with their best friends after an abortion, and they have seen parenting
students struggle to find childcare so they can attend classes. "We are here
to change all that," says Foster.
Foster's lecture, the "Feminist Case Against Abortion" has been receiving
rave reviews from students. At her last lecture at the University of San
Diego, the front page story in the Vista quoted students who called FFL's
message "amazing," "powerful" and "mind blowing." One student told the paper
that she "came pro-choice and defensive" but left thinking she may be pro-
life.
Foster's speech has also been recognized as one of the 22 "Great Speeches in
History" on "Women's Rights." (Edited by Jennifer Hurley, it is one in a
series published by Greenhaven Press.)
FFL's College Outreach Program has demonstrated its power to reach college
women and men with a message of hope and empowerment and its capacity to be a
catalyst for long-term changes on college campuses and beyond.
"Today's students are tomorrow's judges, columnists, reporters, legislators,
parents, teachers, activists and voters," said Foster. "It is essential that
we reach them now. Planned Parenthood knows it. The Feminist Majority knows
it. The good thing is that we know it too, and are taking steps to challenge
the status quo. We are taking our bodies back."
For more information on Feminists for Life's College Outreach Program, go to
http://www.feministsforlife.org/copor contact info@feministsforlife.org .
Either of them. But all the medicos are saying is that if you have kids, your chances of getting breast cancer are reduced. So those who never have kids share the same risk as those who have an abortion. You do have to know how to interpret those reports. And it is old news too. Heard that from Mom 20 years ago. Now we have a study to confirm it. Lovely. Nice to see that options are available for those in need. But that does NOT equate to utlawing abortions.
Are you in my face? Thought you were on my screen, guy. Spitting spite. No, I am not lying, nor is all I believe a lie. Tis based upon experience, VAST experience. But you do not want to hear about it I am sure. Having been out in the world longer than you and having had a more widely ranging career than you have had, I cannot accept your statement that 'all I believe is a lie'.
I must warn you that making blanket statements like that is not recommended for all it would take to prove such a statement false was one belief that clearly isn't a lie (false). The earth revolves aroudn the sun. There tis done. YOUR statement has been proven false.
YOU LIED.
Having been out in the world longer than you and having had a more widely ranging career than you have had, I cannot accept your statement that 'all I believe is a lie'. You could if you tried. But you won't make the effort. But what you believe is almost entirely a lie fueled by hatered of men.
Because you and your philsophy is NOT IMPORTANT enough to even get me to look up the stats. MY position is the law of the land - YOU are among those who have the burden, baby, not I. And if killing is the only basis to your argument that abortion is wrong, well, just think of who does the most killing in this world. Hmmmmmmmm? So just killing is not enough. Sorry but there it is. The individuals who are already here take precedence over those who are not. Period. So rant all you will.
And why won't I amke the effort? You are afraid to make the effort. You will upset your little world if you try because reality, dear, is not in tune with your beliefs.
Because you and your philsophy is NOT IMPORTANT enough to even get me to look up the stats. MY position is the law of the land - YOU are among those who have the burden, baby, not I. You view is immoral. You proabbly hate yourself too because deep down you proabaly know your views are immoral.
Actually Jethro, it would seem from your posts that YOU hate men, much more so that Kit does.
What?
I did look up the stats but really I simply cannot be bothered to hunt out the references and look up and then quote to you, jethro dear, the stats. If you want to know what they are, you can go and look them up for yourself. There are libraries that will be more than happy to help you.
Giving a damn whether the unborn live or die and then NOT giving a damn about whether they live or die AFTER they have been born is NOT a moral position, jethro. That is merely self-righteous interference in someone else's business. Coming between a woman and her maker.
So go home and mind your own.
I have to actually disagree with Kit and step to the other side for just a moment. Personally, if you hold the belief that even an embryo is equivalent to a fully developed human, and there's never going to be any conclusive evidence against such a notion, then I don't have a problem with someone being against abortion. Naturally I would expect them to consider it a horror and murder and want the practice to come to an end. I would expect someone to sound like Jethro.
But whether abortion is right or wrong isn't exactly the question. The question is should we actually make it illegal? Is a legal ban the solution to the problem? Personally, I don't think so. And what I find hypocritical and distasteful are those people who don't care about the welfare of the mother, or the welfare of the child after it's born. They're happy either seeing the would-have-been mother get punished for choosing an abortion or having the child brought into a world where it's not wanted and won't necessarily be well cared for. To have such callousness, and yet claim one is acting on behalf of human dignity seems to me like outright hypocrisy. Making abortion illegal doesn't solve the problem of abortion at all. All it does it satisfy the bloodlust of the sexually repressed who wish to see women punished for their promiscuity. Real progress does involve choice, and helping women choose life rather than being forced into it.
I did look up the stats but really I simply cannot be bothered to hunt out the references and look up and then quote to you, jethro dear, the stats. You are either incapable of looking or are afraid of what you will find or both.If you want to know what they are, you can go and look them up for yourself. There are libraries that will be more than happy to help you. You made a statement. You should want to know if it is true. But like many liberals you don't care a bout the truth it is only about what you want to believe.
Giving a damn whether the unborn live or die and then NOT giving a damn about whether they live or die AFTER they have been born is NOT a moral position, jethro. Spouting the lie that people that oppose abortion don't care about those already here. That is a damn lie that is not supported by any proof. It is just another example of you saying and believing anything in order to hold on to your outrageous beliefs. You would make a good religious zealot if you were inclined in that direction.That is merely self-righteous interference in someone else's business. No it is about killing unborn children that have already began life's path.Coming between a woman and her maker.
So go home and mind your own. Why don't you stop being dishonest with yourself? You believe in a lie.
Oh yes the opinion that it is better to kill the unborn child because it may have a difficult life, Oh that one is just sooooo reasonable.
Generalizing is generally a bad idea.
Those opposed to killing what they see as a human being and what they see as a horrid and wrong pracice are accused of somehow not caring about the mother or child after they were born. Really ? So you have PROOF of that ? Let's see it. And be specific. But for a minute let's say all people who are opposed to abortion don't care about the woman and child after they are born. Well what does that say about the accuser, apparently they don't care about them either, especially the child since they have zero problem sucking it out of the womb. With all the choices availible it seems like the selfish route to me, if you are going to attack the charachter of those opposed to abortion you better look in the mirror, we're not the ones advocating killing a HUMAN fetus inside of the mother.
This other myth about a child having a bad life etc. is just that, a myth and a generalization. Many people who were very unhappy at first to hear the news that they were going to be a parent go on to become great parents with wonderfull kids. A friend of mine was a father at 18, do you think he and his girlfriend were thrilled about being parents ? Hell no, the minute they saw that child they fell in love and today are excellent parents and wouldn't change it for the world. They now have a daughter as well.
The other generalization used is that they will be unwanted, see above for that. But then of course the other option is adoption if they really don't think they can handle it, no problem there's adoption, ask an adopted kid if he's glad he wasn't aborted. There are many well adjusted and productive indidivduals who were adopted. It's one of the other options availible as oppsed to convienently killing it.
People say it's about choice, we have choice. You can choose not to have sex until you get married, you can choose to use birth control if you choose to have sex. If a pregnancy occurs it was still your choice to take the risk knowing it could happen, you then have the choice to keep the child or give it up for adoption. Or take the easy way out.
Luv2Fly 9/25/02 8:44am- a typical Caucasian viewpoint wrapped in an insular mindset and lacking a global perspective. The same arrogance that prompted the Papacy to view the Earth as the center of everything.
You can choose not to have sex until you get married
In impoverished 3rd world countries this is the norm mostly for women - African males are supposed to be more promiscuous. In India for example, outside of the Westernized elite, sex happens for women only after marriage. The men have no such restrictions - the spread of AIDS (heterosexual) is testament to this.
you can choose to use birth control if you choose to have sex
Third world governments have tried with various measures of success. Related to education and to income levels. To many of the impoverished , sex is the only escape. And the right wingers in the US refuse to fund programs that teach birth control methods in the 3rd world.
If a pregnancy occurs it was still your choice to take the risk knowing it could happen, you then have the choice to keep the child or give it up for adoption
An option in the West perhaps - in the slums of Bombay and Calcutta it gets to be even the 10th child. And who has the means for adoption - except rich Western couples - and there is a thriving business in this also. But supply far, far outpaces demand.
Or take the easy way out.
What makes it easy??
Abortion is a required - though tragic - form of birth control in the 3rd world. This debate should not be about abortion in the West alone!!
Lets see:
Women can only have sex after marriage.
Men however may be promiscuous and are (AIDS is a testemant) (Hetrosexual).
Women, no sex. Men, sex.
AIDS
Women, no sex. Men, sex.
Hetrosexual.
1+1=7
I'm trying to add this up but it just don't figure.
Hey Einstien, what color am I ? You don't know do you so before you open your hate filled yap, think for a moment, try it, you might like it.
Yea that would be like Muslim's calling anyone who isn't an infidel. There's arrogance everywhere.
Yea it's all our fault that somneone is too dumb to figure out......."hmmm, let's see, I have no job, our country is impoverished, we've had famine, drought and war and I have to live off of food donations from those evil people in the U.S, I know I'll keep doing it and have 8 kids, that ought to help my situation" Yea it's all our fault we don't teach them about birth control.
Well Naradar I can't controll who gets elected in India or elsewhere. I can here. So instead of complaining why don't you do something ? No that would be to hard for you, you'd rather complain, it's easier than actually doing something if your so concerned about these people. Typical.
Naradar, has anyone "in the slums of Bombay and Calcutta " considered keeping it in their pants? I guess that is too much to ask for.
THX 1138 9/27/02 10:53am-
I guess I was being a bit obtuse. It is true that in most poor and middle class ( by income) families , women having sex before marriage is rare.
However, there is no dearth of whores in India. The abject poverty and the lack of status or value for females causes families to even sell girls off into prostitution. Bombay has that infamous red light district. A lot of Indian men have whores as their first sexual experience.
AIDS in India is largely thru heterosexual sex. One example is Indian truckers - on the road for weeks and months. These guys consort with whores and get HIV . The bad part of it is that they come home and give it to their wives also - and the innocent woman is victimized.
Another reason abortion is a legit form of birth control there.
Abortin is legal in many places but it is never "legit."
an impoverished 3rd world country shows some compassion
A law approved by King Gyanendra has legalized most abortions in Nepal, where women who ended their pregnancies used to face prison terms.
Hundreds of Nepalese women die each year from unsafe abortions, and women's rights advocates say they hope the new law will reduce the mortality rate.
To get an illegal abortion would be a "choice."
It is always a choice to obey the law or to break the law, fold.
yeah and its a choice whether to obey the law or break the law when it comes to assassinating those who would perform abortions too, yet in your eyes that's acceptable.
yeah and its a choice whether to obey the law or break the law when it comes to assassinating those who would perform abortions too, yet in your eyes that's acceptable.
It would be a choice. That has always been my position. If you even attempt to understand what I write you should be able to understand my position. Instead you ignore what I write. It is either because you do not truly understand my position or you are dishonest. For the record the only thing I wrote is that when someone does kill an abortion provider he should be allowed to use the theory of defense of others in his trial. The jury can accept it or not. I never said the person should not be charged and tried. GOT IT?
I never said the person should not be charged and tried. GOT IT?
nor have you said that they should.