I'm still trying to understand how we get from "none of my business"
It is your business. It is everybody's business.
Huge difference between precision bombing aimed at the opposition and accidentally and regrettably getting an innocent child compared to a medical procedure aimed at getting the innocent child only.
It is unfortunate that left wingers do not understand the concept of intent.
because if you aren't, you advocate and support alcoholism.
Not comparable to abortion. You can think a few drinks are fine but drunkeness is not. It is the concept of intent that you apparently have a problem with, crabs.
it's none of my business. abortion is everyone's business.
that you even ask the question tells me that you think what happens with a woman's body is somehow your business. abortion is everyone's business.
how about we make this compromise...you get a say in what a woman does with her body and women get a say in if they should cut your balls off?
okay with you?
crabs again shows how much of an idiot he is. Just say it crabs, you won't compromise becuase you think butchering the unborn is a right.
If you don't want to legislate because you're not a woman is like saying you can't legislate what people of different race, ethnicity, age, etc. do because you're not one of them.
it is painfully apparent you have no idea what you are talking about
That isn't what it is about. It is about killing human beings and the delight or indifference some people take in it.
Perhaps they aren't defined as humans yet, at least not in our society. This why the question "what is a human being" is tantmount to this conversation
A discussion that presupposes that there is some level of killing unborn children that is acceptable is not rational.
Yes, it is. Morality, not rationality, is the question here
A moral person cannot say, well it is okay to butcher children under certain circumstances but not under other circumstances. The butchery of children is wrong under all circumstances.
No, a person cannot be moral in your moral doctorine. A utilitarian would view it as a moral choice
If you don't want to legislate because you're not a woman is like saying you can't legislate what people of different race, ethnicity, age, etc. do because you're not one of them.
People often legislate those of other races, creeds, sexes, most of the time, not truly representative of their district, and least from a diversity perspective
Okay, that's what I thought you were getting at. The system isn't going to be perfect. Some representatives are going to have constituents which are fairly homogenous. Some are going to have a lot more diversity in their constituents. You're not going to keep every faction happy. Legislators have to try and decide what is best, what is most favorable.
Jethro is better at giving a straight answer than you are.
and you too apparently, since this avoided my question entirely.
If you don't want to legislate because you're not a woman is like saying you can't legislate what people of different race, ethnicity, age, etc. do because you're not one of them.
well...I don't hink you should legislate what kind of skin products someone with a different skin type can use...but beyond that the comparison makes no sense.
I mean, I don't advocate someone getting hundreds of body piercings, but that doesn't mean that I want to outlaw it either....because it's none of my business
That is part of the problem, Damon. The senses have been numbed over the years. It is sort of like the Holocaust pictures and reports. It was quite a shock to the world when it first was found out, but the bar was then raised quite high. Now, when we hear of the horrors that happened in Rwanda or even the Iraqi mass graves, it does not evoke the same emotions as it did during the second World War. There is little anger against the U.N. for letting this happen and turning a blind eye. There is also little anger over our government turning a blind eye to the deaths of the unborn. It truely is sad.
Now, on to what a human is.
Is someone who is so severely retarded that they cannot care for themselves still a human being? I am sure that you have seen the type of person that I am talking about. Usually they are being pushed around in a wheelchair and staring out into space because they do not have the ability to do anything themselves. Would you advocate killing this person simply because they do not fit your definition of what a human being is? We can call it abortion in say the 18th trimester if it makes you feel better. Is this alright also?
Let me ask you this, Damon, if tomarrow there is undisputed scientific proof of life beginning at conception, how would you feel knowing that you did nothing to stop abortions now? How would it make you feel knowing that you allowed the death of innocent children to go unanswered by you and that you even fought for their right to continue with abortions?
Turning the question around on me, if it is proven that life does not begin at conception, at least I know that I was fighting for what I believed to be a child. It would not bother me knowing that I tried to save what I thought was an innocent child. It would not have hurt any mother or left any such things for me to ponder and have to live with.
Then it is a dead human being and you are back at square one
Hardly, it is a human being in need of some assistance to stay alive.
Nope. You aren't wrong. Why didn't you just come right out and ask "Rich, do you think abortion is murder?" instead of beating around the bush about what I might think?
If you want my opinion just come right out and ask.
I'm sorry Rick. I know that you are trying to find a middle ground in this, but I do not believe that there is one. To ask someone who believes that it is murder from conception that question is the same as asking them if it would be alright to abort a child up until they are in middle school.
It is either right or wrong. I happen to believe that it is wrong and that we need to protect the unborn child from this form of murder just as we would need to protect a child from any other form of murder.
Look at how far this idea of abortion has progressed Rick. We actually have people saying it should be legal to have a child laying on a table that is still connected to the mother being "aborted". Is it really all that far of a stretch to go from that to making it legal after the cord is cut?
How far are we willing to let it go? I say that irregardless of how you feel about the issue we should stop it all together before it gets any farther out of control.
Do you support more funding for sex education in school? At what age do you think such education should begin? I've read a lot of articles about pregnant 12-13 year olds. This was unheard of when I was that age.
How about condom distribution in school? Should that be funded?
Answer to your sex ed question depends on what exactly you want to teach my children. Unmarried sex is wrong, that is why it is also called living in sin. Condoms do not change that.
"Protected sex" is sold to these children as if it is failsafe, which it is not. Condoms break, pin holes can be present, etc. It does encourage sexual behavior as well. If you believe that there is no consequences to your actions, then what is there to stop you from doing them?
Talking to your children is a good way to go though. Explain to them what happens and the possible long term affects on their lives. This I find far more exceptable than having the school teach whatever it wishes.
That is why I wonder if all this school teaching, free condoms, etc. is such a good idea. Perhaps it is encouraging the behavior that it is meant to control?
I agree that the main responsibility should fall on the parents. But sadly many parents fail miserably at the task of teaching their kids about these issues. Possibly because they are uncomfortable with discussing it, or maybe they just have blinders on and think "it can't happen to my kid", or just plain don't care.
I'm a firm believer in abstinence and I have done the best I can to teach that to my kids. But I am also a realist and know that my children may opt to disregard abstinence. That is why I have informed them about birth control and protected sex. I have also told them that only abstinence is a 100% guarantee against an unwanted pregancy and/or STD.
Very few people wait until they are married to have sex these days. And a lot of folks never do get formally married even though they have long term relationships and have kids.
As far as "Protected sex" is sold to these children as if it is failsafe, which it is not.
I disagree. It may be that way in some schools, but that is not what my kids learned when they were in school. It was impressed upon them that there was no contraceptive device that was 100%.
If you want my opinion just come right out and ask.
that's what I thought I did.
look, you say I'm "all for it" and I "support" it, both of which I ahve never said...and you won't tell me how you get that from my stating that it's none of my business.
but I say you think it's murder and you give me shit because you didn't actually say it, even though it iswhat you think?
and you still haven't addressed the question that I came right out and asked.
You may have a point there. It is something I have spent a lot of time thinking about. I can't but wonder how many other parents take the time to think about it.
are you for the total prohibition of alcohol?
because if you aren't, you advocate and support alcoholism. Are fine and dandy with people becoming alcoholic.
this is the logic you are applying to me.
it's not my business to make compromises with. I can't have an abortion.
By the rules imposed by me, and for disucssion sake, you can.
I can't even get pregnant.
it's none of my business.
try asking viv...she's the one who may actually have some business making such a decision.
Weeny
that you even ask the question tells me that you think what happens with a woman's body is somehow your business.
how about we make this compromise...you get a say in what a woman does with her body and women get a say in if they should cut your balls off?
okay with you?
Jethro is better at giving a straight answer than you are.
I'm still trying to understand how we get from "none of my business"
It is your business. It is everybody's business.
Huge difference between precision bombing aimed at the opposition and accidentally and regrettably getting an innocent child compared to a medical procedure aimed at getting the innocent child only.
It is unfortunate that left wingers do not understand the concept of intent.
are you for the total prohibition of alcohol?
because if you aren't, you advocate and support alcoholism.
Not comparable to abortion. You can think a few drinks are fine but drunkeness is not. It is the concept of intent that you apparently have a problem with, crabs.
it's none of my business. abortion is everyone's business.
that you even ask the question tells me that you think what happens with a woman's body is somehow your business. abortion is everyone's business.
how about we make this compromise...you get a say in what a woman does with her body and women get a say in if they should cut your balls off?
okay with you?
crabs again shows how much of an idiot he is. Just say it crabs, you won't compromise becuase you think butchering the unborn is a right.
"abortion is everyone's business."
Then why won't you opt for a solution that will lead to fewer of them? Isn't that what you want?
If you're not part of the solution. jethro, you're part of the problem.
If you don't want to legislate because you're not a woman is like saying you can't legislate what people of different race, ethnicity, age, etc. do because you're not one of them.
I suppose if your posting do not reflect you then they are even more worthless than I thought.
The people who are intelligent enough to understand my positions hardl;ythink that has any bearing on my character.
It's obvious you resort to hostilities (your favorite word!) when cornered
You advocate butchery. You won't admit it but by implication you do.
I enjoy a good steak as much as the next guy, so yes, I believe butchers have a right ot their business
This just shows how stupid you are.
you have no concept of logic, so it is no surprise you don't what a debate actually is
Does the above make you feel better about yourself? My guess is you have a HUGE inferiority complex. But deservedly so, of course.
No, it makes me realize how fruitless an intelligent discussion is with someone as closed minded as yourself
Rick 5/4/04 8:26am
I think that is the best way to go about it. Of course you will have staunch morons like jethro here who are inflexible
It is apparent the two are inseperable.
it is painfully apparent you have no idea what you are talking about
That isn't what it is about. It is about killing human beings and the delight or indifference some people take in it.
Perhaps they aren't defined as humans yet, at least not in our society. This why the question "what is a human being" is tantmount to this conversation
A discussion that presupposes that there is some level of killing unborn children that is acceptable is not rational.
Yes, it is. Morality, not rationality, is the question here
A moral person cannot say, well it is okay to butcher children under certain circumstances but not under other circumstances. The butchery of children is wrong under all circumstances.
No, a person cannot be moral in your moral doctorine. A utilitarian would view it as a moral choice
that you even ask the question tells me that you think what happens with a woman's body is somehow your business.
what about father's rights?
It is your business. It is everybody's business.
no, it's the parents business and theirs only
It is unfortunate that left wingers do not understand the concept of intent.
it's unfortunate you have shown no sign of logical competentcy
It is the concept of intent that you apparently have a problem with, crabs.
people aren't intentionally alcoholics
If you don't want to legislate because you're not a woman is like saying you can't legislate what people of different race, ethnicity, age, etc. do because you're not one of them.
that is often the case however.
that is often the case however
How do you mean Damon?
People often legislate those of other races, creeds, sexes, most of the time, not truly representative of their district, and least from a diversity perspective
Okay, that's what I thought you were getting at. The system isn't going to be perfect. Some representatives are going to have constituents which are fairly homogenous. Some are going to have a lot more diversity in their constituents. You're not going to keep every faction happy. Legislators have to try and decide what is best, what is most favorable.
and you too apparently, since this avoided my question entirely.
well...I don't hink you should legislate what kind of skin products someone with a different skin type can use...but beyond that the comparison makes no sense.
ThoseMedallingKids 5/4/04 1:48pm
agreed
well...I don't hink you should legislate what kind of skin products someone with a different skin type can use
Why do you think that shouldn't happen?
"and you too apparently, since this avoided my question entirely."
I let you by with two dodges. I didn't feel any need to answer you.
I'm still waiting for an explanation of how one gets from "none of my business" to "advocate" and "fine and dandy"
you won't
I mean, I don't advocate someone getting hundreds of body piercings, but that doesn't mean that I want to outlaw it either....because it's none of my business
Rick 5/4/04 6:04am
Those pictures are outta line, Rich. Go back and delete them.
No. Those are pictures of reality, whether you like it or not.
We saw enough of those in high school.
That is part of the problem, Damon. The senses have been numbed over the years. It is sort of like the Holocaust pictures and reports. It was quite a shock to the world when it first was found out, but the bar was then raised quite high. Now, when we hear of the horrors that happened in Rwanda or even the Iraqi mass graves, it does not evoke the same emotions as it did during the second World War. There is little anger against the U.N. for letting this happen and turning a blind eye. There is also little anger over our government turning a blind eye to the deaths of the unborn. It truely is sad.
Now, on to what a human is.
Is someone who is so severely retarded that they cannot care for themselves still a human being? I am sure that you have seen the type of person that I am talking about. Usually they are being pushed around in a wheelchair and staring out into space because they do not have the ability to do anything themselves. Would you advocate killing this person simply because they do not fit your definition of what a human being is? We can call it abortion in say the 18th trimester if it makes you feel better. Is this alright also?
Let me ask you this, Damon, if tomarrow there is undisputed scientific proof of life beginning at conception, how would you feel knowing that you did nothing to stop abortions now? How would it make you feel knowing that you allowed the death of innocent children to go unanswered by you and that you even fought for their right to continue with abortions?
Turning the question around on me, if it is proven that life does not begin at conception, at least I know that I was fighting for what I believed to be a child. It would not bother me knowing that I tried to save what I thought was an innocent child. It would not have hurt any mother or left any such things for me to ponder and have to live with.
Then it is a dead human being and you are back at square one
Hardly, it is a human being in need of some assistance to stay alive.
"No. Those are pictures of reality, whether you like it or not. "
Doesn't make them any less out of line.
Could you make this work, Dan?
a woman has a miscarriage...is she guilty of manslaughter?
Rick 5/4/04 6:51pm
It's not my problem if you find reality to be out of line.
leave the pictures
I was planning to
so, if you think this is murder, are you gonna incarcerate all these women?
I don't recall calling it murder. Can you provide a post number where I did?
then what's the problem?
if it's not murder, why would you outlaw it?
you say it's the intentional killing of an innocent human being. If you don't consider that murder, then what do you think it is?
Why is Scott Petersen being charged with a double murder?
I don't recall saying I don't think it is murder. I haven't mentioned it one way or the other.
saidit, I asked why you thought
crabgrass 5/4/04 8:07pm
Nope. You aren't wrong. Why didn't you just come right out and ask "Rich, do you think abortion is murder?" instead of beating around the bush about what I might think?
If you want my opinion just come right out and ask.
Could you make this work, Dan?
I'm sorry Rick. I know that you are trying to find a middle ground in this, but I do not believe that there is one. To ask someone who believes that it is murder from conception that question is the same as asking them if it would be alright to abort a child up until they are in middle school.
It is either right or wrong. I happen to believe that it is wrong and that we need to protect the unborn child from this form of murder just as we would need to protect a child from any other form of murder.
Look at how far this idea of abortion has progressed Rick. We actually have people saying it should be legal to have a child laying on a table that is still connected to the mother being "aborted". Is it really all that far of a stretch to go from that to making it legal after the cord is cut?
How far are we willing to let it go? I say that irregardless of how you feel about the issue we should stop it all together before it gets any farther out of control.
Grandpa Dan Zachary 5/4/04 8:12pm
Do you support more funding for sex education in school? At what age do you think such education should begin? I've read a lot of articles about pregnant 12-13 year olds. This was unheard of when I was that age.
How about condom distribution in school? Should that be funded?
I started talking to my kids about birth control/protected sex when they were about 10-11 years old.
Answer to your sex ed question depends on what exactly you want to teach my children. Unmarried sex is wrong, that is why it is also called living in sin. Condoms do not change that.
"Protected sex" is sold to these children as if it is failsafe, which it is not. Condoms break, pin holes can be present, etc. It does encourage sexual behavior as well. If you believe that there is no consequences to your actions, then what is there to stop you from doing them?
Talking to your children is a good way to go though. Explain to them what happens and the possible long term affects on their lives. This I find far more exceptable than having the school teach whatever it wishes.
This was unheard of when I was that age.
That is why I wonder if all this school teaching, free condoms, etc. is such a good idea. Perhaps it is encouraging the behavior that it is meant to control?
Grandpa Dan Zachary 5/4/04 8:51pm
I agree that the main responsibility should fall on the parents. But sadly many parents fail miserably at the task of teaching their kids about these issues. Possibly because they are uncomfortable with discussing it, or maybe they just have blinders on and think "it can't happen to my kid", or just plain don't care.
I'm a firm believer in abstinence and I have done the best I can to teach that to my kids. But I am also a realist and know that my children may opt to disregard abstinence. That is why I have informed them about birth control and protected sex. I have also told them that only abstinence is a 100% guarantee against an unwanted pregancy and/or STD.
Very few people wait until they are married to have sex these days. And a lot of folks never do get formally married even though they have long term relationships and have kids.
As far as "Protected sex" is sold to these children as if it is failsafe, which it is not.
I disagree. It may be that way in some schools, but that is not what my kids learned when they were in school. It was impressed upon them that there was no contraceptive device that was 100%.
that's what I thought I did.
look, you say I'm "all for it" and I "support" it, both of which I ahve never said...and you won't tell me how you get that from my stating that it's none of my business.
but I say you think it's murder and you give me shit because you didn't actually say it, even though it iswhat you think?
and you still haven't addressed the question that I came right out and asked.
Grandpa Dan Zachary 5/4/04 8:54pm
You may have a point there. It is something I have spent a lot of time thinking about. I can't but wonder how many other parents take the time to think about it.